Showing posts with label open carry fanatics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label open carry fanatics. Show all posts

Thursday, October 30, 2014

Rights come with responsibilities.

And they also come with the fact that if you misuse your "right", you may have an encounter with the cops.

And, yes, whether you like it or not, the cops want people to report someone who is carrying a weapon in public:
Arlington Police Lieutenant Chris Cook said residents should not feel too intimidated to report people carrying guns in public places.

'Let us determine what is lawful or unlawful,' Lt. Cook said Friday.

Open carry advocates are upset that they get "sussed" by the cops.  But, here is what the cops have to say about this:
Lt. Cook points out it's against the law to knowingly file a false police report. But he said the greater fear is that citizens fail to report armed individuals, either because they feel intimidated or because they've become desensitized to guns on the streets.
Let's face it, there is a good point to calling the cops if someone sees someone who looks like they shouldn't be walking around with a firearm  if it was true that Jared Loughner was openly carrying prior to the Tucson shooting.

Especially if the person walking around has the type of weapon that could wipe out a lot of people.

Last year, a student parked a car at a supermarket near the campus of the University of New Haven, He got out carrying two handguns, which he took to class with him. Bystanders thought that looked suspicious, even though it was actually legal for him to have the handguns. They called 9-1-1. Police responded and investigated. They found another gun in his car, an illegal assault rifle, Police also found the student also had news clippings and pictures of previous spree killers all over his bedroom. 

So, yeah, those callers were not technically reporting something illegal: just something suspicious. And they probably prevented a mass shooting.


The problem is that the open carry movement is about baiting the cops and those who don't feel comfortable seeing people walk around in public with a lot of firepower.  That's a recipe for disaster.

Seriously, are you people so stupid that you would enable a mass shooter?  You give him/her the firepower--would you also give him/her the opportunity?

So, if you clowns want to walk around carrying weapons in public--live with the consequences of your actions.

But, I have to admit I am happy that the open carry movement exists since they are so far out on the fringe of gunloonery and full of irresponsible people that they are the best thing to happen for our side.  Eventually, they will piss off most people with their antics.

See also:

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Maybe it's because of all the baseball bats...

The only things getting assaulted were baseballs, and the only things stolen was bases.

OK, assume this is correct.  How does this effect the "shootings happen in gun free zones?"

Conversely, it has been said that Jared Loughner openly carried his weapon for at least 15 minutes prior to when he went on his rampage in the parking lot in Tucson.

Why should people be forced to decide who is a "good guy with a gun" and who is a potential threat?


Monday, September 22, 2014

Question of the day.

Is this the America YOU want to raise kids in?



You gotta love open carry, they make it so much easier to make the pro-gunners look really fringy.  Not that they need too much help to do that anyway.

Wednesday, September 3, 2014

Public Opinion of the Open Carry Movement

Nope. Gonna have a hard time trying to get people to see you as somewhat "normal" no matter what you say.


Doesn't look like she's too happy with these people.

Kinda says it all: doesn't it?

Thursday, August 14, 2014

Open Carry v. Open Carry

Open Carry Texas is hoping to have a demonstration in Houston's predominently black Fifth Ward.  The hope is that an armed society is a polite society will somehow prevail.

"We have a bad history with white men who would come into the 5th ward with guns in the name of a lynch mob," said activist Quanell X


It seems that some opponents of the march not only are exercising their right to self-defence, but are also openly carrying.  The open carry movement seems to be achieving its objective of getting people to exercise their "rights".

When will more people wise up that the phrase "an armed society is a polite society' comes from a crappy sci-fi novel and has no basis in reality?

Anyway, watch as perceived "rights" clash with each other and the rule of law!

Is this really the world these people want to create?  Do you want to live in a society which is like Somalia?

BTW, if the video embed code doesn't work, watch the video here:
www.khou.com/story/news/local/2014/08/13/open-carry-demonstration-meeting/14037147/

Saturday, August 2, 2014

Open Carry Dildo

I guess it had to happen.


Gotta admit a dildo is more intimidating than a gun:


So, strap one on and make up for your lack of manhood.

Friday, August 1, 2014

Open Carry Loser #1298


Best comment award to the article this came from goes to Roland Smith for:
So lemme get this straight.....We have a socially marginalized guy with a ton of debt, no girlfriend and an obsession with guns and an anti-police, anti government mentality walking the crowded streets of Carytown on Saturdays with a crew of equally socially rejected antisocial police haters with assault rifles which may or may not have been purchased with proper background checks.

And they wear bullet proof vests.

Has anyone stopped to wonder WHY these guys might want Richmonders to be desensitized to the sight of AR-15s in Carytown???

Connect the dots people.

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

Quote of the Day

Call me crazy, but I feel one of my responsibilities as a gun rights advocate is to show people that gun owners are reasonable, responsible people who aren’t a threat to the innocent. If I were to, say, walk into Chipotle carrying an AK at the combat ready, I’m pretty sure I’d accomplish the exact opposite. And I really couldn’t blame regular Joe for being afraid of me. Think about it, guys. If a cop walks into Chipotle with a rifle, people will get scared. If a soldier walks into Chipotle with a rifle, people will get scared. If some unknown guy walks into Chipotle with a rifle, especially if he’s carrying it at the combat ready, people are going to get scared. In America, carrying a rifle into a restaurant isn’t a normal act. Right or wrong, it scares people. And you won’t make people less scared of guns by intentionally scaring them with guns.

Source, which is well worth a read.

Monday, July 28, 2014

The right to keep and bare breasts! (or open carry breasts)

You wanted to see something else?
It seems that the open carry crowd in Texas is upset at some women lawfully displaying their breasts in public.

Somehow, it seems to me that it would be a "god" (goddess?) given right if such a thing were to exist since breasts, unlike firearms, are part of the human body.   Firearms are not only man made, but a fairly recent one on the historic timeline (maybe a thousand years or so back), which seems to knock the possibility that a deity had anything to do with their creation.

In fact, I would think that even the most hard core religious fanatic would have to admit that god created the human body. Women's breast perform the function of nurturing babies, which again points to the fact that they may have been designed by a creator deity if one believes in such things.

Or did you really buy into the modesty fig leaf thing?

Additionally, it seems that it is not against the law to "keep and bare breasts" in Texas (at least the part where women openly carry their breasts), which means they can exercise their goddess given right to do just that.

Kinda like realising that god is responsible for most abortions:  god is also responsible for women having breasts.

As the song says:  Ya gotta like boobs a lot!



But if you have a problem with women exercising their right to keep and bare breasts, maybe you ought to consider that walking around with a weapon isn't exactly a friendly act. In fact, it is a threatening act to most thinking people.

Did that ever occur to you, or are you just too stupid for that to occur to you?

Next week: the NRA demands that Open Carry Texas ogle breasts; to be followed by a limp retraction.


See also:

Monday, June 23, 2014

It's bad when your "own side" also thinks you are assholes: part 987.

It seems that a pro-gun blog ran a poll that confirms what most people have been saying about the open carry movement.

YOU ARE A BUNCH OF ASSHOLES

The really amusing part of this is that these polls are usually hijacked by people who want to express their opinion, which given this was on a "pro-gun" site would make me think that the open carry crowd would have hijacked it.

But they didn't.

In fact, the opinion of most "pro-gun" people is that the open carry movement is funded by Bloomberg to make gun owners look bad.

But, as I like to point out, we don't NEED to pay you to make dickheads of yourselves--you do it of your own free will.

Thank you for being yourselves.

You make our jobs so much easier by your acting naturally.

Sunday, June 15, 2014

I understand the confusion

I know you lot don't want to be like Europe, but I understand his confusion.

Saturday, June 14, 2014

An opposing opinion

I have to admit that it is quite nice of the people at this blog to allow a raging "gun loon" like myself the ability to give the opposite side of the issue. 

After all, we know that the good old days were quite different from what they are now.

People like this solid citizen used to open carry and had easy access to firearms.  There weren't many criminals and the ones out there didn't walk around with guns.

That point came to me when I was in my basement and heard a loud noise from upstairs.

It was at that point that I realized I didn't have a machinegun the way granny did because of those gun grabbers.  I would have had to make due with a semi-automatic pistol to deal with whatever intruder happened to be upstairs.

Unfortunately, it was my grandkid.

At least medical science has progressed and the little monster will live.

But, I have to admit I miss the good old days when solid citizens like the one I have pictured here had access to machineguns, short-barrelled shotguns, and other firearms that are hard for the average citizen to own.

It's nice to know that some people out there agree with me and want to carry weapons like these on the streets these days.

Even better, they can shoot the police in Indiana.  Hell, when grannie's friend John Dillinger did that sort of thing, the cops went and hunted him down.  These people weren't criminals, they were otherwise law abiding citizens.

But, Johnny would be proud to be a Hoosier these days!  Hell, he might even be alive thanks to the wise legislators in Indiana.

I miss the good old days and wish there were more guns out there in the hands of people that the law deems to be criminals.

But, they were good people who knew how to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

Friday, June 13, 2014

So, which side really enables the gun violence?


Points 7 & 8 in this blog post by Kristin A. Goss and Philip J. Cook seem to be the pretty important to this meme:
7. The primary goal of gun regulation is to save lives by separating guns and violence. Federal and state laws regulate who is allowed to possess them, the circumstances under which they can be carried and discharged in public, certain design features, the record-keeping required when they are transferred, and the penalties for criminal use. The goal is to make it less likely that criminal assailants will use a gun. The evidence is clear that some of these regulations are effective and do save lives.

8. Gun violence can also be reduced by reducing overall violence rates. Gun violence represents the intersection of guns and violence. Effective action to strengthen our mental health, education, and criminal justice systems would reduce intentional violence rates across the board, including gun violence (both suicide and criminal assault). But there is no sense in the assertion that we should combat the causes of violence instead of regulating guns. The two approaches are quite distinct and both important.
Perhaps, a better term for the movement should be the "gun regulation" movement, especially since the first words in the  Second Amendment are; "A well-regulated".


FYI:
Kristin A. Goss is Associate Professor of Public Policy and Political Science at Duke University. She is the author of Disarmed: The Missing Movement for Gun Control in America. Philip J. Cook is ITT/Terry Sanford Professor of Public Policy and Professor of Economics and Sociology at Duke University. He is the co-author (with Jens Ludwig) of Gun Violence: The Real Costs. Kristen A. Goss and Philip J. Cook are co-authors of The Gun Debate: What Everyone Needs to Know.


- See more at: http://blog.oup.com/2014/06/gun-debate-facts-united-states

Wednesday, June 11, 2014