Pro-Gun, Anti-NRA

[wildcat junkie]

Not only did his post not explain how he believes we have a Bill of Needs attached to the US Constitution, it perfectly illustrates that junkie has trouble with the meaning of the written word when used in a sentence.  

 

To him, that one word must mean the government can decide what rights you need and ban any they feel you don't.  It's scary any American would think like that.  Must've been told to think that by someone somewhere.

Ok, we don't "need" the Bill of Rights then.

 

Sorry if I misunderstood.

[Mr VJP]

 Nothing like a foot up side the head to make a lasting impression.

 

Heck, if I knew he was mentally disabled, I would've given him a pass from the start!  LOL!

[wildcat junkie]

Aside from VJP... Not speaking for him... just offering up my respectful disagreement with your statements...Yes there is a need... but the bill doesn't give you the need... you already have that... the bill gives you the right which allows you to meet that need... the bill is not issuing you a need

the real need is freedom... the amendments are the rights given to maintain that need... so technically it is a Bill of RIGHTS... issued to protect a need...Freedom... which is already ours and we are trying to protect.. just my thought

I think perhaps we are using differing words to make the same point.

[wildcat junkie]

Not only did his post not explain how he believes we have a Bill of Needs attached to the US Constitution, it perfectly illustrates that junkie has trouble with the meaning of the written word when used in a sentence.  

 

To him, that one word must mean the government can decide what rights you need and ban any they feel you don't.  It's scary any American would think like that.  Must've been told to think that by someone somewhere.

Is that something you plagiarized from Sarah Palin? Sure sounds like her goobledygook.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

the majority of americans with 2 little kids would not. don't pretend that they would.

"oh hey look honey that guy over here with the mullet and fatigues is walking around with an assault rifle" Lets ask him if he knows where the toasters are.

Did you miss the use of "I"

[Culvercreek hunt club]

It still refers to a need.

If you don't need a militia, you don't need the right.

Beside I just posted that the word neccessay was in the amendment, nothing more.

I'm not arguing the validity or the need for the 2nd amendment. I was just pointing out that there is a "need"

If you argue that there isn't a need, then aren't you arguing that we don't need the 2nd amendment or a bill of rights.

The Bill of Rights most certainly is a bill of needs. If they weren't we wouldn't need it.

What's so entertaining is that for me being so insignificant to Mr VJP, he certainly seems to have a hard time resistig the bait.

The word need is not a litmus test for the right. It is a predetermined conclusion not a condition.. Not if it is needed. It IS needed.

[wildcat junkie]

Heck, if I knew he was mentally disabled, I would've given him a pass from the start!  LOL!

Which begs the question. What sort of severe head trauma contributed to your present behavior?

[Doc]

It still refers to a need.

If you don't need a militia, you don't need the right.

Beside I just posted that the word neccessay was in the amendment, nothing more.

I'm not arguing the validity or the need for the 2nd amendment. I was just pointing out that there is a "need"

If you argue that there isn't a need, then aren't you arguing that we don't need the 2nd amendment or a bill of rights.

The Bill of Rights most  certainly is a bill of needs. If they weren't we wouldn't need it.

What's so entertaining is that for me being so insignificant to Mr VJP, he certainly seems to have a hard time resistig the bait.

OMG ..... I am awful glad that it is not you who is in charge of interpreting the Constitution. My gosh, what a wacked-out, stretched-out and ridiculous set of assumptions and conclusions. The good news .... You will never occupy a position where that kind of warped reasoning will ever determine the fate or execution of any sort of constitutional law.

 

You guys are getting so far afield now with this thread that I can't remember what the original point was. At any moment, I expect to see this thread turn into what the definition of the word "is", is......lol.

[Mr VJP]

Doc, it perfectly illustrates why some folks hate the NRA though.  When you mangle the meaning of the Constitution to push an agenda, you are not going to support any organization that works to stop you.

 

[philoshop]

It seems that many people simply believe the government will never try to take away the particular gun that they own. I mean the specific gun that they have in their closet with serial #xxxx that they use to hunt with a few times a year. I know several gun owners who think this way whether they are aware of it or not. What these folks don't understand is the stated end-vision of the rabid anti-gun crowd: the 'magical kingdom' of a world without guns.

Whether you like the NRA or not, they are are the organization that is best able to fight against the anti's. By the time the gun-grabbers get around to that hunting gun in the closet it will be far too late to start caring.

[mmkay]

 

It still refers to a need.

 

If you don't need a militia, you don't need the right.

 

Beside I just posted that the word neccessay was in the amendment, nothing more.

 

I'm not arguing the validity or the need for the 2nd amendment. I was just pointing out that there is a "need"

 

If you argue that there isn't a need, then aren't you arguing that we don't need the 2nd amendment or a bill of rights.

 

The Bill of Rights most  certainly is a bill of needs. If they weren't we wouldn't need it.

 

What's so entertaining is that for me being so insignificant to Mr VJP, he certainly seems to have a hard time resistig the bait.

 

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.

I’m not sure I follow your thinking. And want to make sure of what you are saying.

I always thought the MILITIA part of the second amendment was referred to a standing state/federal army. And the second part of the amendment provided the individual the right to keep and bear arms so that he/she could defend against the government.

Are you saying the MILITIA part is referring to a bunch of folks in gun clubs that group together and call themselves a militia?

Lastly I thought he word NECESSARY always meant...hey we just fought the English for independence. Their pissed at us. They will come back (did in 1812), the French and Spanish like the new world as well. We the founding fathers understand this, so we need an army….the army is necessary…but we don’t want the government to use it against the people. Do you not think this is what it means?

[Five Seasons]

.. your stance is getting to sound a little pro gun control anyway.

 

 

where does it stop? Can I own and walk around with an RPG, armor piercing bullets, a tank? There needs to be "some control". Keep believing society can make its own decisions and you'll keep seeing crazy bastards ruin it for the rest of us.

 

I guess I've never understood open carry. So long as I can have my weapon, I feel no need to display it unless provoked.

 

 

Edited December 19, 2014 by Belo

[Five Seasons]

Did you miss the use of "I"

 

of course not. But you're an exception. that was my point.

 

[steve863]

If a society like ours finds it completely acceptable for people to be walking around department stores armed to the teeth then we honestly have a society that is very seriously screwed up.  You guys can flame away to your hearts content, you surely won't be changing my opinion about it, that's for damned sure.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

If a society like ours finds it completely acceptable for people to be walking around department stores armed to the teeth then we honestly have a society that is very seriously screwed up.  You guys can flame away to your hearts content, you surely won't be changing my opinion about it, that's for damned sure.

You do realize it was part of an organized and publicized demonstration. They were outside too. Folks shouldn't have been surprised by it. It wasn't like they were eating breakfast in a diner and a group totting AR's and AK's strolled through the door.

 

I would like to add that in the normal course of a day,  I see no reason to open carry in an environment like this and I would be watching anyone that did with concern. Situational awareness. Personally I don't want a bad guy to know I am carrying.  I don't get some States take that you can open carry but need a permit to conceal carry.

Edited December 19, 2014 by Culvercreek hunt club

[steve863]

You do realize it was part of an organized and publicized demonstration. They were outside too. Folks shouldn't have been surprised by it. It wasn't like they were eating breakfast in a diner and a group totting AR's and AK's strolled through the door.

 

 

It may have been staged, but open carry is legal in some states.  To me it's simply lunacy whichever way you choose to do it.

[Doc]

It may have been staged, but open carry is legal in some states.  To me it's simply lunacy whichever way you choose to do it.

Actually, there have been quite a few times over the years when I have exercised my right to "open carry" my rifle/shotgun when I have taken a short-cut down the road to get back home. I'm glad that we have that ability. Oh and by the way, no one drove off the road in a panic. Oh yes, I too have survived seeing others doing the same. So legal open-carry is not really a bad thing.

 

As for walking into stores or restaurants, I have to agree that that is kind of a weird thing to do, and I'm not exactly sure what the point was that those guys were trying to make. Whatever it was, it did reflect on all of us in a not-too-helpful way. I don't see it as something that should be made illegal, but more like something where some good sense and thoughtfulness of others should be used. There are some places where if I saw that I would be ducking for cover assuming a mass shooting was about to commence ..... lol.

[wildcat junkie]

You do realize it was part of an organized and publicized demonstration. They were outside too. Folks shouldn't have been surprised by it. It wasn't like they were eating breakfast in a diner and a group totting AR's and AK's strolled through the door.

 

I would like to add that in the normal course of a day,  I see no reason to open carry in an environment like this and I would be watching anyone that did with concern. Situational awareness. Personally I don't want a bad guy to know I am carrying.  I don't get some States take that you can open carry but need a permit to conceal carry.

I don't have a problem with open carry during demonstrations like you cite. Unfortunately, some looneys do stroll into diners, grocery stores & such with ARs & AKs.

 

If people would also excersize their constitutional right to calmly & defiantly walk out of those establishments as their form of protest, the business owners would soon put and end to such childish behavior by "open carry" zealots.

 

Unfortunately the average person would be intimidated due to the fact that they wouldn't know what the gun totin' a$$ had in mind. Add children to the mix & IMO it could be considered child abuse. What about their constutional right to the pursuit of happiness?

 

I like the response by a school district that had a Dad escorting his daughter to school while "exercizing his right to open carry". They adopted a policy to go into lockdown any time this childish goon showed up showing off his toy. I don't know how it was even legal for him to be on the scool grounds with a weapon.

 

I like your reference to "watching anyone that did with concern". What makes any sane, stable adult feel the need for such behavior?

 

Now i'm sure we will here some "leftist' acusations from some of the zealots on the extreme right. 

[Five Seasons]

You do realize it was part of an organized and publicized demonstration. They were outside too. Folks shouldn't have been surprised by it. It wasn't like they were eating breakfast in a diner and a group totting AR's and AK's strolled through the door.

 

I would like to add that in the normal course of a day,  I see no reason to open carry in an environment like this and I would be watching anyone that did with concern. Situational awareness. Personally I don't want a bad guy to know I am carrying.  I don't get some States take that you can open carry but need a permit to conceal carry.

 

why demonstrate at a target though? Why not the public courthouse? Demonstrations like these always tend to hurt more than they help is my only argument.

 

Look at what Greenpeace just did down in South America. Look at the crap PETA has done, the civil rights movements in Ferguson. People view the extremists and tend to be turned off more than anything. Same can be said for religious extremists, fox news, msnbc etc etc. The more unwilling you are to compromise and the less open minded you are the crazy you appear. And perception is often reality whether it's right or wrong.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I've never been accused of being Left...lol. But in the course of every day normal activity if I see a gun (and I am not talking about noticing a CCW on someone), it does get my attention, If the person is in hunting clothes as Doc mentioned I am more likely to pull over and ask how their luck was. While standing in line at the bank to make a deposit.....probably not a similar response.

 

It is sad really where we have come as a society. I can remember going to school with the gun visible in the vehicle to catch a couple hours of hunting after class. I can remember pulling out a new knife I got for Christmas to show the guys, only to have the teacher show us the one he got as well. Having a knowledge of guns and how to safely handle them was the norm, not the exception where I grew up, especially long guns. To bad it isn't the same today.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

why demonstrate at a target though? Why not the public courthouse? Demonstrations like these always tend to hurt more than they help is my only argument.

 

Look at what Greenpeace just did down in South America. Look at the crap PETA has done, the civil rights movements in Ferguson. People view the extremists and tend to be turned off more than anything. Same can be said for religious extremists, fox news, msnbc etc etc. The more unwilling you are to compromise and the less open minded you are the crazy you appear. And perception is often reality whether it's right or wrong.

Target was picked because at that point they were holding firm to the "whatever is legal" stance and not giving in to the Rabid Mothers Against (Insert cause of the day here). It was a firearms friendly environment. The police were also there.

[wildcat junkie]

Actually, there have been quite a few times over the years when I have exercised my right to "open carry" my rifle/shotgun when I have taken a short-cut down the road to get back home. I'm glad that we have that ability. Oh and by the way, no one drove off the road in a panic. Oh yes, I too have survived seeing others doing the same. So legal open-carry is not really a bad thing.

 

 

I did the same thing as a teenager on the fringes of the south suburbs of Chicago in the '60s.

A buddy & I killed our 2 man limit of Cottontails fight behind a local Xerox office one January day.

 

Nobody batted an eye because it was common & most everyone knew what we were up to.

 

If I had stopped & went into a business establishment carrying my shotgun, I think there might have been a different response.

 

Even then, I don't think I would have been gunned down by the cops.

 

I did get a dressing down, rightfully so, when a cop stopped us when we were seen walking down the street with my Dad's 30/40 Krag & 8mm Mauser. We were going out to shoot in the local dump where there was an unoffical gun range with an earthen bank for a back stop. There wasn't a lot of drama. I was told in no uncertain terms that it wasn't safe to shoot such a high powered weapons in the flat terrain & I promptly turned around it took the rifles home as instructed.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Open carry in a store or something with a rifle or shotgun? Odd, but I dont know that I have a problem with it. With a handgun? I have absolutely no problem with what so ever. I read an article not too long ago that made a good point. Want to know who the law abiding citizens are? Allow open carry, and allow the police to spot check you if you are doing so.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Open carry in a store or something with a rifle or shotgun? Odd, but I dont know that I have a problem with it. With a handgun? I have absolutely no problem with what so ever. I read an article not too long ago that made a good point. Want to know who the law abiding citizens are? Allow open carry, and allow the police to spot check you if you are doing so.

Nah, not interested in swapping on right for another.

[jjb4900]

I always thought open carry / concealed carry laws were specific to handguns.........and I'm not really sure it's a "law" in NY but more a restriction that's placed on your permit to carry one.