sansooshooter wrote:The media has to write anti gun stories as the majority public opinion for their Anti 2ND amendment garbage is polling low compared to national debt and the economy.
The Tribune like most so called news papers and TV news are not the watch dogs of government . They consider themselves partners with government . I see them as nothing more than cheerleaders for totalitarian big government as they always advocate for more and better control over the individual rights of the citizen.
Sadly when I talk to people who still consume news from them . They have little real knowledge of whats in these so call reasonable restrictions . Also they simply can not accept that the anti gun crowds ultimate goal is no private citizen ownership of firearms!
I was at a fund raiser for a friend last night and talked to many gun owners and the consensus was these bills will not pass. I asked them if they had contacted their state reps and senators plus the governor. Most said not yet ! Besides those bills have no chance. I said they do have a chance as long as you don't let them know how you feel about the bills. So please call and mail your reps and senators. That is my real concern that to many on our side are thinking everyone else will take care of their 2ND amendment rights.
I've said it before and will say it again - people will kill people. They did it before guns and they will do it after guns. Guns aren't the problem. People are.
jdege wrote:The one number that isn't quoted is how many appeals were over-turned in each county. If that were included in the story, we'd see that there are only two or three sheriffs who have this problem. And we'd be able to see what is really shocking - that in this day and age we still have a handful of sheriffs who routinely abuse their authority.
Or a handful of judges undoing a correct call by the sherriffs.
Thunder71 wrote:Glad he's not worried about the open carry law, whew.
If OC was killed off and only CC was allowed, how many people here would get their undies in a bunch over it? My guess is not many. I would suspect many would be overjoyed at it actually. I could be wrong, and hopefully I am, but my perception and opinion is that (at least on here...) OC Is pretty disliked, not encouraged, and in some cases, outright hated.
Thunder71 wrote:Glad he's not worried about the open carry law, whew.
If OC was killed off and only CC was allowed, how many people here would get their undies in a bunch over it? My guess is not many. I would suspect many would be overjoyed at it actually. I could be wrong, and hopefully I am, but my perception and opinion is that (at least on here...) OC Is pretty disliked, not encouraged, and in some cases, outright hated.
I suspect that open carry and trespass provisions are squarely in Paymer's crosshairs, as well as "enhnanced" background checking.
Thunder71 wrote:Glad he's not worried about the open carry law, whew.
If OC was killed off and only CC was allowed, how many people here would get their undies in a bunch over it? My guess is not many. I would suspect many would be overjoyed at it actually. I could be wrong, and hopefully I am, but my perception and opinion is that (at least on here...) OC Is pretty disliked, not encouraged, and in some cases, outright hated.
How many times are you going to ignore the answers and explanations you've received, and still ask for answers and explanations on that topic?
Thunder71 wrote:Glad he's not worried about the open carry law, whew.
If OC was killed off and only CC was allowed, how many people here would get their undies in a bunch over it? My guess is not many. I would suspect many would be overjoyed at it actually. I could be wrong, and hopefully I am, but my perception and opinion is that (at least on here...) OC Is pretty disliked, not encouraged, and in some cases, outright hated.
What we realize, that you apparently don't, is that a carry law that forbids OC creates a legal minefield for anyone who carries.
If the law allows CC, and forbids OC, we will see ordinary carrying citizens, with no criminal intent, charged, fined, and sometimes jailed, for accidentally exposing their firearm. This happens with distressing frequency in states in which CC is legal but OC illegal. A couple of simple Google searches should find you some incidents.
There are some of us who think OC, as a political statement, is always a bad idea, rather more of us who think that it can be a bad idea in certain circumstances.
There are none of use who think that OC should be illegal, because we understand that the purpose of banning OC is not to keep people from OCing, but to provide a tool by which everyone who carries, whether OC or CC, can be harassed under color of law.
Thunder71 wrote:Glad he's not worried about the open carry law, whew.
If OC was killed off and only CC was allowed, how many people here would get their undies in a bunch over it? My guess is not many. I would suspect many would be overjoyed at it actually. I could be wrong, and hopefully I am, but my perception and opinion is that (at least on here...) OC Is pretty disliked, not encouraged, and in some cases, outright hated.
What we realize, that you apparently don't, is that a carry law that forbids OC creates a legal minefield for anyone who carries.
If the law allows CC, and forbids OC, we will see ordinary carrying citizens, with no criminal intent, charged, fined, and sometimes jailed, for accidentally exposing their firearm. This happens with distressing frequency in states in which CC is legal but OC illegal. A couple of simple Google searches should find you some incidents.
There are some of us who think OC, as a political statement, is always a bad idea, rather more of us who think that it can be a bad idea in certain circumstances.
There are none of use who think that OC should be illegal, because we understand that the purpose of banning OC is not to keep people from OCing, but to provide a tool by which everyone who carries, whether OC or CC, can be harassed under color of law.
Ok. Got it. That makes sense.
As for carrying openly as a political statement, I 100% agree that should NOT be done.
XDM45 wrote:As for carrying openly as a political statement, I 100% agree that should NOT be done.
"Agree" isn't the right word.
There are a number of people who think it's a bad idea in general. I believe that while I've seen it done in times and places that were unwise, and perhaps counter-productive, I tend to think that it is a valuable educational tool, done at the right time, at the right place, and by the right people.
XDM45 wrote:As for carrying openly as a political statement, I 100% agree that should NOT be done.
"Agree" isn't the right word.
There are a number of people who think it's a bad idea in general. I believe that while I've seen it done in times and places that were unwise, and perhaps counter-productive, I tend to think that it is a valuable educational tool, done at the right time, at the right place, and by the right people.
Well, in my own case, I carry openly for several reasons, all of which I've posted before in another thread, so I won't rehash them here. I've only had two incidents, both minor. One was the manager at Cub Foods who simply asked me to store it in the car; and the other was at a gas station by a customer who I let in line and he commented to me, "no, go ahead, you're the one with a gun." I simply replied that he was there first and should go ahead. That's it. A third incident, in which the gun was never mentioned, I was at a bank and at the end of the line, but was asked if I needed assistance with something. I did my business and left. No mentioning of the gun at all, so I'm not even sure if that even really counts as an incident since I can only assume the expedited service was due to OCing, but I don't have any proof of it.
I know guns are a hot button topic for many people, so in my dealings with them, of which there have only been two thus far where the gun was even mentioned, both have been very minor without any issues at all. I'm not going to get into a debate with anyone, nor am I going to really discuss it where others can hear. I'm sensitive to the fact that they don't know me, may be afraid, may have some agenda and could look to cause a scene with a MWAG, etc, so caution is king and key. As such, I tend to remain silent and say as little as possible. If you don't speak, they don't know what you're thinking, but if you say something, then they do. Sometimes less is more. There's a time and place for discussing opinions, but in public with a firearm isn't it (ideally speaking). Now if someone is truly interested and wants to speak one-on-one, fine, but it would be away from other people, in a different location, etc, but I haven't had that happen yet. If and when it ever does, my words and actions will be guarded as they always are when I carry. I'd only really discuss it on-the-spot to de-escalate even the remotest potential of an unhappy situation. I'm not afraid, but I don't want to become a test case or even be annoyed by a MWAG call. I just want to go on about my business peacefully. So why not carry concealed? I went over that as mentioned above, and I accept the risks. We all make our choices in life.
In fact, I need to be more careful than someone who conceals when they carry because I am out in the open. Yup. It opens me to more risk. I get it. I'm ok with that like I said. I believe that carrying a gun is a huge responsibility and one that needs to be thought out in depth; and the same goes for openly carrying as well. Both present some unique mindsets which need to be employed constantly. If anything, OCing makes me much more aware and brings with it another layer of responsibility, which I've addressed that in another thread as well.
I'm not a fan of OCing to be "cool", or to make a political statement, or anything else other than personal choice. Same thing for CC.
I know I'm an opinionated person and I express my opinions, even when those of them consider them "wrong", and I'm ok with that. Whatever you may think of me, I know that all you have to go on is my words here, so I take it with a grain of salt, but if you ever met me, saw me in public, got to know me, I think you'd see a different side than what mere words typed on a keyboard can convey. Certainly, this is true for all of us.
If there's a good way to educate people about carrying, and OCing, I'm all for hearing about it and would be glad to help to dispel the fear with understanding
When one no longer fears it, they can understand it. When one understands it, they have knowledge of it. Without being open to understanding, there can be no knowledge because fear is in the way.
You live in Minnesota. Land of 10,000 passive aggressive fools. Just because no one said anything doesn't mean no one did anything. You probably leave a trail of future Brady Campaign donors in your wake.
To the two forum members who have used lines from my posts as their signatures, can't you quote Jesse Ventura or some other great Minnesotan instead of stealing mine? - LePetomane
Heffay wrote:You live in Minnesota. Land of 10,000 passive aggressive fools. Just because no one said anything doesn't mean no one did anything. You probably leave a trail of future Brady Campaign donors in your wake.
XDM45 wrote:I tend to remain silent and say as little as possible.
Wait, what?
You must be a VERY different person in real life than you are on the internet....
No, actually I'm the same online as off (SURPRISE!!) It's just that when carrying, that's not really the time to make waves unnecessarily or escalate an avoidable situation.
