• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Why "law abiding" matters to the larger RKBA community

Status
Not open for further replies.

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
So, your comment to Mama stating her commentary was 'completely non sequitur' w/o providing any type of rationale or counter argument is just insolence on your part.

Rationale was provided two sentences down in my post.

again, your comment to CC for ME is rude and disrespectful behaviour, and affront towards that member since you didn't provide any rationale why you didn't understand the poster's commentary.

I asked a question about intent, leaving open the potential there were other options I had failed to consider. Hardly an affront except to those looking to take offense.

also, your comment about moderation shows your extreme contempt towards the site's moderation and as such damagingly undermines the moderator(s) role on this forum.

On this front I'm guilty as he11. Very easy for teacher's pet to claim grossly biased moderation is not contemptible. But this all occurred AFTER you had taken it upon yourself to insult me with your favored form of diminutive address, and then presume to dress me down for what you view as violations of social etiquette. You don't get to use what I did after your post to justify your post.

further, your attempt at an insulting comment 'non savant' regarding my having significant mental disabilities or other personality trait deficiency is actually quite humorous...'non' ~ "not of the kind or class described" used in conjunction w/the word savant actually means "not of the kind or class described" "significant mental disabilities."

Again, you can't use what I did after your post to justify your post.

I'm sorry. Do you find "not savant" offensive? Simply ask and I won't address or refer you that way again...so long as you show me the same courtesy. You'll note, I never use that form of address except in response to your addressing me in a way I have repeatedly made clear to you is offensive to me. If you can't take it, don't dish it out.

Simply put, you hold yourself in very high regard, thinking yourself far smarter than others here, a savant of sorts. You're not. Get over yourself. You routinely presume to "challenge" others, while rarely providing anything of material benefit to advance a discussion. Small men tear down what better me build.

You only ever see "not savant" in return for "mate." Balls in your court.

But as other posts make clear, others fully notice when moderation is blatantly biased. And that hurts forum traffic. That you take advantage of your friendship with the moderator to continue contributing to this problem is rather pathetic.

so charles, utbagpiper, piper, your query post above has been acknowledged, instead of summarily dismissed, and objective evidence provided to show you the rationale for my post to call you out.

Your evidence is weak or would be inadmissible in any court. Your rationale for calling me out, is that I don't adhere to your line of thought on CCing into Costco. Get over it. I obey the law. I'm not obliged to obey every bigoted, private policy in existence.

finally, that you believe a singular, colloquialism word for friend, of camaraderie, greeting, can cause you to lose all self control should cause you real significant concern.

Intent matters. We are not friends, we do not have a friendly relationship. You use the term only because you know it annoys me. Your buddy (another singular, colloquialism word for friend, of camaraderie, greeting) the moderator, allows you to do so with impunity, while penalizing me for returning the favor.

Now, if you'd like to comment on the OP, please do. Otherwise, you're dragging yet another thread off topic.
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
I beg your pardon?? Are you of some version of Christian faith? What about the 10 Commandments, esp. the First?? "No written law"??
Good grief!!

uh, what about them? you mean the commandments, divided over exactly when the Ten Commandments were written and who wrote them, but originally given to the Jews, and now used, with different interpretations by those of the Jewish, Christian and Islamic faiths?

Version of what kinda faith?

ya written law ~ from say 1792-1750 B.C. Code of Hammurabi !!
R e a l l y!!
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
What do you consider humorous in my post?

Is your comment intended as a persona insult, in violation of forum rules?

All laws duly passed are presumed legal until a court rules otherwise. Laws prohibiting gun sales to convicted felons and (private party) across State lines may offend our sense of the RKBA, but have been upheld as constitutional. Violation is non-violent, and some may justify "civil disobedience." My post was one example of the benefits of abiding these laws.

Why do you presume to know my stance on the matter? I haven't discussed it. Nor is it the topic of the OP nor of this thread.

There are things I can control and things I can't. If I could control government conduct, there would be little need for RKBA activism because I'd just repeal all the unconstitutional gun laws. I can't control government conduct except perhaps via the voting booth or the jury box.

This thread is about what each of us can do ourselves. It points out the benefits to the larger community when individual gun owners obey the law and use lawful means to effect needed changes.

Left-wing causes can far more safely engage in civil disobedience than can gun owners. That isn't fair. Welcome to life. Deal with reality, or complain about things beyond your control.

Well then by all means, please take this chance to stop wasting your time and mine. If you've been wrongly prosecuted and fought the good fight, you have my thanks. But that doesn't give you any more right to be insulting, rude, or provocative than those of us who have done our bit without such injustices coming to us.


wow charles, utbagpiper, piper...bit paranoid about insults aren't we?

and sorry your thread YOU started isn't about any of those things you thought and said it was about...read the GAO report and reread the FOX BS newspeak article...neither correlate to each other...
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
snip...cuz WhoGivesAS of your bloody continued victim pronouncements of being picked on and you haven't done anything wrong and there is favoritism...

as stated and why i posted the definition of the word 'insults' but it seems we have a communication issue since it is obvious you have not demonstrated any behavioural change to show you understood the word's definition.


sorry, charles, utbagpiper, piper, to my chagrin, your tirade last year where you raised such a stink of being picked on, bad moderation & perceived favoritism with your rants and your efforts still got you banned ~ remember?

well you should be extremely proud as your bravado, rants, and unjust accusations about favoritism put a gentleman whom i have a great deal of respect for into a completely irreconcilable position and coupled with philosophical differences regarding how to work through the issue with the forum's well being maintained, decimated and literally destroyed any an all camaraderie between us!!!

no this, at no time charles, utbagpiper, piper no matter what you may believe, i have not gone to, nor complained about, nor asked for any retribution from this forum's moderators nor owners about the demeaning and constant derogatory commentary about myself or about other members spewed through your posts.

no charles, utbagpiper, piper, you need to grow a pair and accept accountability for your childish playground tirades as well as your demeaning commentary which resulted in your posts being deleted or you being banned several times last year and quit rallying your 'victim battle cry' your posts & banning is from favoritism, or solus is needlessly picking on me, oh XYZ member is too...oh my, oh my, whatever shall i do?

understand this ~ the only thing your mantra "moderator victim line" does is literally destroy whatever respect the moderators have to do their job to the rest of the forum membership...

now grow up, act like an adult, and fix your own website for your state as it still states 2017 nonsense.

added...charles, utbagpiper, piper, you may call me whatever you want, cuz as, "It is reported to have appeared in The Christian Recorder of March 1862, a publication of the African Methodist Episcopal Church, where it is presented as an "old adage" in this form: Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never break me." (wiki) sorry you never truly understood that concept mate!
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
When I consider how my light is spent
Ere half my days in this dark world and wide,
And that one talent which is death to hide
Lodg'd with me useless, though my soul more bent
To serve therewith my Maker, and present
My true account, lest he returning chide;
"Doth God exact day-labour, light denied?"
I fondly ask. But Patience to prevent
That murmur, soon replies: "God doth not need
Either man's work or his own gifts; who best
Bear his mild yoke, they serve him best. His state
Is kingly. Thousands at his bidding speed
And post o'er land and ocean without rest:
They also serve who only stand and wait."

In the third line, “And that one talent which is death to hide,” is explicit reference to The Parable of the Talents in the Gospel of Matthew. In Matthew, a talent is about thirty pounds of silver equal to the value a commoner might produce in a life time.


thank goodness in the era this was written, and collaborated by religious scholars: "Yet the particular talent invested in the parable is money, on the order of a million U.S. dollars in today’s world. In modern English, this fact is obscured because the word talent has come to refer mainly to skills or abilities. But this parable concerns money. It depicts investing..."

so i am confused...your point to this thread?
 

FreedomLover

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
35
Location
Crust of Earth
Wow----

UtahBagpiper defends himself from what seems to be a mass attack from a mob and accused of being aggressive. :shocker::shocker:

One who defends himself is NOT the aggressor!
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Your rationale for calling me out, is that I don't adhere to your line of thought on CCing into Costco. Get over it. I obey the law. I'm not obliged to obey every bigoted, private policy in existence. /QUOTE]

lets see how did your opening post go:

quote: This report from FoxNews helps to highlight why it is so very important for gun owners to be law abiding and for gun groups to be strict in espousing adherence to existing gun laws. unquote.

does anybody else feel it is kinda hypocritical of the upstanding august member from UTAH to start a post on the importance of gun owners to be law abiding yet continues to profess on a public forum how he ignores contractual private property restrictions, which he feels are bigoted (?) to satisfy his own personal interests?

sincere question, are you ok charles, utbagpiper, piper, cuz you actually had a melt down around this same time last year, have you seen your personal physician of late as your exhibited behaviour and disjointed commentaries could be a serious health since it appears to be recurrent issue.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
I can read and have---- a lot!

Noting your failure to actually provide evidence of the alleged inaccuracy of my observation .[/QUOTE

how bout it i provide a bit of insight...

if you would have posted in 2016 > a simialr statement to respond to charles, utbagpiper, piper, the response could look like a rambling half a page of text ~ maybe containing commentary about ethnicity or religious innuendo

or you would have seen playground taunting calling you a an idiot, bigoted, uneducated, lack reading comprehension etc.,

or you would discern subject started on this topic, you reply on a sub set of the topic and like Mama’s response and receive a response back stating ‘non sequitur’ or another latin fallacy & debating term w/o any type cohesive statement why...

or in your half page response you would see statements given as absolutes of law or policy, yet when you ask for a cite or reference you would be subjected to tirades of i don’t have to, forum fules don’t mandate, look it up yourself, etc. however, you provide a subective statement, the demand for cite begins unrelentingly.

or when you resort to or challenge Charles, utbagpiper, piper’s tactics of playground taunts, katie bar the door...indignation rants, screams for moderation & retribution, you get the general picture ~ oh wait, you can see their modus operandi in this thread right now!

this public forum is comprised of a collection of diverse cultured & well educated individuals w/different experience bases who ask a question or attempt to discuss , in great detail w/outstanding references and cites, a wide latitude of subjects which have ranged history of firearms, state laws, history, etc.

there are those who might not have the subject matter background to participate and when they ask a question or might respond with their take of the subject or insert their emotionally charged post or even challenge a poster and throw the BS flag into the discussion; they should not be subject to overt or blatant insults ~ all for expressing their opinion(s)!

further, this is a privately owned, public forum run by individuals who moderate the ebb and flow and keep things reasonably even keeled. you screw up, they react w/posted warnings, private communications, finally banning, temp or permanent. those who moderate, while some say is too loosy goosy, should not be subjected to abuse from ranting members! i have found moderation fair...even when my posts are deleted for crossing the line of decorum and when i complained they pointed out my error in judgement in my rant towards someone or thing.

freedomlover, what you have witnessed is someone who over the last several years has consistently insulted members, had their posts deleted for those insults, been banned numerous times, all the while hollaring how mistreated they are and they didn’t mean that or do that or or.

added, freedomlover, you have just been thrown into the suckling baby category for your previous post, so how do you feel about that!
 
Last edited:

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,936
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
I can read and have---- a lot!

Noting your failure to actually provide evidence of the alleged inaccuracy of my observation.

how bout it i provide a bit of insight...

if you would have posted in 2016 > a simialr statement to respond to charles, utbagpiper, piper, the response could look like a rambling half a page of text ~ maybe containing commentary about ethnicity or religious innuendo

or you would have seen playground taunting calling you a an idiot, bigoted, uneducated, lack reading comprehension etc.,

or you would discern subject started on this topic, you reply on a sub set of the topic and like Mama’s response and receive a response back stating ‘non sequitur’ or another latin fallacy & debating term w/o any type cohesive statement why...

or in your half page response you would see statements given as absolutes of law or policy, yet when you ask for a cite or reference you would be subjected to tirades of i don’t have to, forum fules don’t mandate, look it up yourself, etc. however, you provide a subective statement, the demand for cite begins unrelentingly.

or when you resort to or challenge Charles, utbagpiper, piper’s tactics of playground taunts, katie bar the door...indignation rants, screams for moderation & retribution, you get the general picture ~ oh wait, you can see their modus operandi in this thread right now!

this public forum is comprised of a collection of diverse cultured & well educated individuals w/different experience bases who ask a question or attempt to discuss , in great detail w/outstanding references and cites, a wide latitude of subjects which have ranged history of firearms, state laws, history, etc.

there are those who might not have the subject matter background to participate and when they ask a question or might respond with their take of the subject or insert their emotionally charged post or even challenge a poster and throw the BS flag into the discussion; they should not be subject to overt or blatant insults ~ all for expressing their opinion(s)!

further, this is a privately owned, public forum run by individuals who moderate the ebb and flow and keep things reasonably even keeled. you screw up, they react w/posted warnings, private communications, finally banning, temp or permanent. those who moderate, while some say is too loosy goosy, should not be subjected to abuse from ranting members! i have found moderation fair...even when my posts are deleted for crossing the line of decorum and when i complained they pointed out my error in judgement in my rant towards someone or thing.

freedomlover, what you have witnessed is someone who over the last several years has consistently insulted members, had their posts deleted for those insults, been banned numerous times, all the while hollaring how mistreated they are and they didn’t mean that or do that or or.

added, freedomlover, you have just been thrown into the suckling baby category for your previous post, so how do you feel about that!
I'll be so presumptuous and answer for FreedomLover.
[video=youtube;OjYoNL4g5Vg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjYoNL4g5Vg[/video]
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
freedomlover, et al., you accused me of mistreatment of another member, allow me to show the membership how disrespectful this member is on other firearm forums...

for your reading pleasure:

Re: 2017 Permit Free Carry, HB 112
Postby bagpiper » Fri 20 Jan 2017 4:39 pm

Karl wrote:
(off topic arrogant legal fecal matter deleted).

There is a different thread for discussing the merits of this bill. This thread it intended to discuss its progress through the legislature and what effect it will have on Utah law if passed. Since this is the Utah legislature acting, they are fully empowered to act even under your anti-RKBA bootlicking view of the world. Since this is Utah, Art 1 Sec 6 of the Utah State constitution has at least as much bearing as the 2nd article of amendment to the US Constitution. Your love affair with Scalia's opinions which had to be crafted to keep Kennedy on board, are entirely irrelevant.

Demonstrate at least the minimal on-line etiquette to keep your crap opinions in the thread where they belong.

I've seen what one arrogant jerk can do to kill off another pro-gun forum. We don't need our own version of solus killing off the Utah forum with similar insufferable sanctimoniousness.

Last edited by bagpiper on Fri 20 Jan 2017 6:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
bagpiper

http://www.utahconcealedcarry.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=22561&p=251953&hilit=solus#p251953

here is what karl posted as a response to charles, utbagpiper, piper's initial post on a thread he started which charles, utbagpiper, piper deleted as "off topic arrogant legal fecal matter deleted"

Re: 2017 Permit Free Carry, HB 112
Postby Karl » Fri 20 Jan 2017 2:51 pm

We have no such rights.

Concealed carry has always been by state legislative grace.

Scalia explained all this in Heller.
Karl
Marksman

Posts: 171
Joined: Thu 06 Oct 2016 12:45 pm

gentle readers, do you see any "off topic arrogant legal fecal matter" that needed deleted in Karl's post?

freedomlover, et al., this is the control phreak we have endured over the last several years with these types of behavioral insulting antics which caused him to be banned numerous times that you believe was mistreated!!
 
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
does anybody else feel it is kinda hypocritical of the upstanding august member from UTAH to start a post on the importance of gun owners to be law abiding yet continues to profess on a public forum how he ignores contractual private property restrictions, which he feels are bigoted (?) to satisfy his own personal interests?

Actually, I suspect most people have the cognitive capacity to understand the difference between duly passed laws, and merely private policies. But your post does provide decent evidence that your problem with me has very little to do with anything in the current thread, and a lot to do with your inability to impose your value set on me.

I note that you rare ever condemn anyone who admits to discretely violating a private employment policy so as to protect themselves while earning an honest living. You've never condemned our member who admits to carrying into a hospital in contradiction of their private policy. But you are quite fixated on my admission of discretely carrying in to Costco.

The good citizens of my State have set laws about which areas are off limits to guns. All other areas are legal to carry and if any private property owner doesn't care for guns, he is free to enforce. Failure to provide any meaningful enforcement suggests to me he doesn't much care about his policy and I see no reason to care more than he does. Kind of like forum rules about only advocating for illegal conduct. Only the most blatant offenses are ever moderated as most any traffic is better than no traffic at this point.


solus said:
sincere question, are you ok charles, utbagpiper, piper, cuz you actually had a melt down around this same time last year, have you seen your personal physician of late as your exhibited behaviour and disjointed commentaries could be a serious health since it appears to be recurrent issue.

There is nothing sincere in your question. It is an insult and a slight and you intent it as such. When you overcome your delussions of being ee cummings to use proper capitalization you might have room to enquire about anyone else's mental or emotional state. Of course, it is easy to maintain your cool when your buddy (there is that friendly term again) enables you to needle others with impunity, while shielding your delicate sensibilties from any reality of how others view you.

You dare chide a fellow member for posting the same link you did. It apparently never occurs to you how many have you on their ignore list and never see what you post.
 
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Wow----

UtahBagpiper defends himself from what seems to be a mass attack from a mob and accused of being aggressive. :shocker::shocker:

One who defends himself is NOT the aggressor!

I'm afraid you're seeing first hand the reason this forum has lost so much participation the last few years. Read the archives from more than 3 years ago and you'll find some wonderful threads full of vigorous, but mostly civil discussion and debate about topics actually related to RKBA. In addition to enlightening discussion, this was THE premiere site for obtaining accurate, up-to-date information on laws regarding RKBA and self-defense.

But things have gone down hill. We're down to a single active moderator who--though once quite good--is now far too often obviously biased on personality. We have far more "made calls" than we do even handed, objective application of the rules. The legal pages are woefully and dangerously out of date. And the bulk of the ever shrinking number of posts are either from anarchists evangelizing their hatred of government and getting as close to inciting violation of law as they can, or from a small number of members of the favored club who post with impunity for the apparent intent to drive away anyone they don't like. They have largely succeeded.

35+ posts into this thread, and other than the initial two responses providinng links to the original GAO report, how many are honestly on topic?

How many are anarchist rantings against government, personal attacks, or responses to the above?

The mod will say I'm as guilty as the attackers because I respond. That strikes me like the current, "zero tolerance" policies in public grade schools where the kid who defends himself gets the same punishment as the bully who has been picking on him for months.

This thread was a bit of test to see what responses I'd get. The results convince me that I need not continue much.

I'm afraid that in not joining their attacking me, you've labeled yourself and the good ol' boys will do their best to run you off unless you convert to their way of doing things.

Best of luck, and thanks.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Moderator, this thread is obviously gonig no where except grossly off topic and into any manner of personal insults and swipes.

Will you please lock the thread and put it out of its misery.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top