Be nice to officers during encounters, they go through quite a bit. [Poplawski trial]

[wrightme]

The example i pointed out("Scott") was simply regarding his decision to try and disarm himself. You guys looked past that and decided to go on the defensive regarding OCing. My argument was not about his type of carry or about him looking for trouble, it was about his decision to reach for his gun. He was also, from what i read, on prescribed medication, not "drugs" in the criminal way you implied.

One of the commands he had supposedly heard WAS for him to disarm.
He could have chosen to disobey THAT command, and obeyed the command to "don't move." A judgement call, and he lost. He could have lost if he had "not moved" too.

I simply do not see how that decision by him has any bearing on this discussion at all.

 

[eye95]

As i said before if you skim through threads regarding negative OC encounters you will see plenty of people saying "OH they gave you a hard time there? I go by there on my way to work, i think ill stop in and see what they say". I have even heard a few people exclaiming how they were going by with their family, one person even talking about how he taught his very young daughter to record him just in case(aimed specifically at police encounters).

The example i pointed out("Scott") was simply regarding his decision to try and disarm himself. You guys looked past that and decided to go on the defensive regarding OCing. My argument was not about his type of carry or about him looking for trouble, it was about his decision to reach for his gun. He was also, from what i read, on prescribed medication, not "drugs" in the criminal way you implied.

Your ultimate point is about the behavior of us OCers here on OCDO. It is appropriate for us to point out that the only solid example you have thus far provided was not an OCer who was not looking for trouble. He was CC under the influence and behaved stupidly, not wantonly.

No need for me to waste any more time posting to you. I find what you have to say to be such a waste of my time that not only will I move on from this discussion with you, but will toss you on my ignore heap with others whose words are a waste of my time to read.

Bye.

 

[wrightme]

You advocated the position that theres nothing wrong with bringing your children and family on a just-for-fun OC trip because it helps your image.

No, I said that I understand how having family along does change how others perceive you.
I do believe that there is nothing wrong with having family along while OCing. I also do not agree that I was saying a thing about a "just-for-fun OC trip." that is YOUR construct, not mine.

You also seem to be hell bent on this theory that i think my opinion is the only opinion. Im not sure how more simply i could explain this to you- you are 110% incorrect in that assumption. I already todl you once that i never said i thought my opinion was the only correct one and you still go ahead and try to make it seem that way..... you even went as far as to put something in quotes that i never even said, so dont talk to me about hyperbole.

That is how you have presented yourself here. If you do NOT desire that image, you might want to step back and rethink how you are presenting.

Now, what post of mine do you feel falsely quotes something that you never even said?

Just because we have different views doesnt mean we cant be nice to eachother broseph.

I entirely agree.

 

[wrightme]

I'm not saying one shouldn't bring light to unlawful actions, but I've seen open carriers act inappropriately, some posting their inappropriate actions on forums.

hron, some of this began here. In that sentence, the dangler that desires clarification is "open carriers act inappropriately...."

Had he posted links to what HE saw, his definition of "inappropriately" would be clear. As it stands, it is not clear, and is entirely subjective.

Are you really of the mindset that if a person cannot post you a link to some half assed news article that anything they say is false? Go on youtube.... I understand you would rather be directly linked there to cut out all the extra work but trust me, go to youtube and look up "open carry stop" etc etc etc and you will see plenty of people acting like complete idiots after being stopped, you will also see plenty of cops being idiots.

Some guys here get SO into carrying a gun that it stops being about protection and starts being about attention. They make carrying a firearm openly into some big-boy hobby and that seems to be when things go downhill.

You can find examples of people being innapropriate on this very forum, go look up any random OC encounter post and look for all the people exclaiming how they are about to go out to a place they know they arent welcome just to "test the waters"...

Ive even seen people say things such as "Oh they kicked you out for OCing? cool ill go by later and test the waters.... ill bring my kids i just taught my 9 year old how to use the video camera "

And that is truly disturbing.

Then you presented the opinion that what YOU felt he was speaking about was 'truly disturbing.'

And, you do specifically state "people being innapropriate on this very forum." By stating it that way, you sure are pointing it out as "dictating what is inappropriate."

 

[Hronisiver]

WHY do you see that as invalid? Seriously? Why? Just because you would not do so?
Speaking of "putting words in mouths." I do not advocate "doing stupid things." But, it seems that to you, if a person is not simply going from point a to point b during [what you feel is] normal day-to-day activities, they are "doing something stupid?"

Is that really what i think? Can we stop assuming to know what the other is thinking here? Lets go by exactly what is TYPED. I never said "make a set path when you OC and dont deviate or else you are a bad guy". I said i dont agree with people going out for a walk around town with their video camera pre-recording and their arsenal tied to their body just to get a good youtube video. Go back and read what i just wrote and accept it as what i actually meant instead of going out of your way to assume you know what im thinking, and that everything i just said wasnt my actual opinion.

I support legal behavior, unless its idiotic as well. Why cant you see the difference between something being "right" and something being "legal"? Its easier to go by whats legal because we all have differing opinions of whats "right", but in my opinions some things are obvious.

I support a person right to free speech but i dont condone the "GOD HATES FAGGOTS" signs that Westboro baptist church holds up.

I support the second amendment but i dont condone "mrak47master" on youtube who walks around with his ak47 slung on his back JUST to see what attention it brings.

Not because he feels he needs it for defense. Not because it fits his lifestyle. Not because hes an OCer going about his business. Because he WANTS to see what attention in will bring.

I repeat, his intentions when carrying were simply to SEEK ATTENTION and its that part that i disagree with. You say you dont care what a person does as long as its legal and you think that using a constitution right for any reason you see fit is going to turn positive heads but it wont, not if you are doing it just for show like a small percentage of OCers do.

No, I highly doubt that such action can be considered legal.
Once again, you resort to hyperbole.

Well my friend correct me if im wrong but the law states what you CANT do rather than what you CAN do so i do believe that it falls squarely on YOUR shoulders to prove that the action in question is in fact illegal. Open carrying a firearm in your hand is not illegal in many places, and waving a gun around is ARGUABLY not illegal if you can prove you were not doing it to instill fear or threaten anyone.

Id check it out if i were you.... if you find out that its your right to do that then you will probably have a blast bringing your family along for your very first dual-wielding shotgun OC trip to walmart.. Its your right after all.


Once again putting words in my mouth.

I do NOT justify bad things. But, you seem to see those things that YOU would not choose to do [whether legal or not] as "bad things."

Try this instead. Support lawful behavior, I do. Bring unlawful behavior to the light of day, I do. The rest is simply whether it is sensible to each person or not, and if it is lawful, becomes the choice of each individual.

Again, i just feel that this "the law is the law" routine is very simple minded and just shields you from having to actually make a responsible decision.

 

[wrightme]

Again, i just feel that this "the law is the law" routine is very simple minded and just shields you from having to actually make a responsible decision.

You know, you should learn how to respond OUTSIDE of the quoted text, so others know without question what I wrote and what you wrote.

But, what do you feel is not a "responsible decision" that some "the law is the law" view shields someone from?

 

[Hronisiver]

hron, some of this began here. In that sentence, the dangler that desires clarification is "open carriers act inappropriately...."

Had he posted links to what HE saw, his definition of "inappropriately" would be clear. As it stands, it is not clear, and is entirely subjective.

I gave you all the information required to explain my opinion to you, if the only thing you have to say in response is that it isnt true because there is no site and therfor doesnt deserve a response then thats fine, but you have the information if you should choose to use it( or god forbid, use the search feature). The only thing a link would have done was given you one less thing to complain about here. If nothing makes sense to you without a cite or a link then im sorry but i wish you luck figuring things out in the future. ANYONES definition of innapropriate is entirely subjective...


Then you presented the opinion that what YOU felt he was speaking about was 'truly disturbing.'

Let me clarify this for you real quick, i didnt find his SPEAKING about it disturbing, i found the act of actually training your daughter to record your police encounters for you to be disturbing.

And, you do specifically state "people being innapropriate on this very forum." By stating it that way, you sure are pointing it out as "dictating what is inappropriate."

Each person dictates for themselves what they find to be innapropriate. You give off the vibe that you have no opinion regarding anything other than whether or not its legal and i just dont believe that.
if a person cannot have an opinion without being considered as having "dicated" what is or isnt appropriate then how are people ever going to get to the bottom of anything?

My opinion is just that, one opinion. I throw it out there into the sea of other opinions and hope ideas can be shared and new things learned, but you really seem adamant about only having YOUR opinion presented, even though you try just as hard to make it seem like im doing the same thing.

 

[Hronisiver]

You know, you should learn how to respond OUTSIDE of the quoted text, so others know without question what I wrote and what you wrote.

But, what do you feel is not a "responsible decision" that some "the law is the law" view shields someone from?

Well big guy, you yourself noticed that im a new member did it ever dawn on you to help me out instead of waiting for me to repeat myself so you can hassle me about it?

You guys really arent big fans of new members/opinions here are you?


As far as your question goes, ive already given you enough examples i have no idea how you havent seen them but i guess ill repeat them.

Open Carrying an ak47 and two pistols down the street just to get a police response so you can record a video for your youtube channel is legal, but i feel its irresponsible and wrong.

Carrying a big sign that says "YOUR *** SON IS IN HELL" to a gay veterans funeral is legal, but i think its irresponsible, immature, disgusting and goes against the purpose of the first amendment.

 

[wrightme]

Is that really what i think? Can we stop assuming to know what the other is thinking here?

That sounds like an excellent place to start. The post you responded to has words that I typed. Try responding to those without presenting hyperbolic restatements, and I will respond to that response of yours.

Lets go by exactly what is TYPED. I never said "make a set path when you OC and dont deviate or else you are a bad guy".

So then, maybe it would help if you were to defing what you meant by your statement. If my restatement for the sake of responding to your hyperbole missed your point, simply make a valid statement instead of overstating it to make it seem ridiculous.

I said i dont agree with people going out for a walk around town with their video camera pre-recording and their arsenal tied to their body just to get a good youtube video. Go back and read what i just wrote and accept it as what i actually meant instead of going out of your way to assume you know what im thinking, and that everything i just said wasnt my actual opinion.

Hyperbole. We haven't been discussing "walk around town with their .... arsenal tied to their body." That is your hyperbolic construct.

I support legal behavior, unless its idiotic as well. Why cant you see the difference between something being "right" and something being "legal"? Its easier to go by whats legal because we all have differing opinions of whats "right", but in my opinions some things are obvious.

Good. I am glad you support legal behavior. You do understand that it is not likely legal to walk around town shaking two shotguns in the air, correct?

I support a person right to free speech but i dont condone the "GOD HATES FAGGOTS" signs that Westboro baptist church holds up.

Neither do I condone that act. But, it is their Right to do such, unless it constitutes "hate speech."

I support the second amendment but i dont condone "mrak47master" on youtube who walks around with his ak47 slung on his back JUST to see what attention it brings.

Why not?

Not because he feels he needs it for defense. Not because it fits his lifestyle. Not because hes an OCer going about his business. Because he WANTS to see what attention in will bring.

So, since it does not match what YOU feel is appropriate, you feel he shouldn't do it?

I repeat, his intentions when carrying were simply to SEEK ATTENTION and its that part that i disagree with. You say you dont care what a person does as long as its legal and you think that using a constitution right for any reason you see fit is going to turn positive heads but it wont, not if you are doing it just for show like a small percentage of OCers do.

I thought you did not want to dictate what others do, as long as it is legal, yet here you do try to dictate what other do based upon whether you agree with it or not.

 

[wrightme]

Well big guy, you yourself noticed that im a new member did it ever dawn on you to help me out instead of waiting for me to repeat myself so you can hassle me about it?

I pointed that out to you once already. You must have missed it.

You guys really arent big fans of new members/opinions here are you?

I have no problem with new members/opinions. But, you have been a bit above and beyond in that respect within your first 6 posts.

As far as your question goes, ive already given you enough examples i have no idea how you havent seen them but i guess ill repeat them.

Open Carrying an ak47 and two pistols down the street just to get a police response so you can record a video for your youtube channel is legal, but i feel its irresponsible and wrong.

Carrying a big sign that says "YOUR *** SON IS IN HELL" to a gay veterans funeral is legal, but i think its irresponsible, immature, disgusting and goes against the purpose of the first amendment.

So, you DO want to dictate what others are allowed to do based upon your opinion?

Unfortunately for you, the First Amendment is one of the messiest of the Rights we have. It does not filter for "irresponsible, immature, disgusting, or any of the other things that give you the willies." In fact, that is EXACTLY the way it should be. If all speech was not those things, there would be no real need to have that Right recognized, because no one would desire to limit what others can express as their opinion/religion.

In the same light, the Second Amendment Right should not be constrained to only those things which you, me, or that other guy "feel" is appropriate. Limiting it to only those things that "feel" appropriate misses the point entirely.

 

[Hronisiver]

Your ultimate point is about the behavior of us OCers here on OCDO. It is appropriate for us to point out that the only solid example you have thus far provided was not an OCer who was not looking for trouble. He was CC under the influence and behaved stupidly, not wantonly.

No need for me to waste any more time posting to you. I find what you have to say to be such a waste of my time that not only will I move on from this discussion with you, but will toss you on my ignore heap with others whose words are a waste of my time to read.

Bye.

Sir you are so defensive about this that you arent even letting reality in. I never said everyone on this site does what i claimed i saw a FEW people doing..... I am really not sure exactly why you are trying to stretch out and exaggerate what im saying to make me seem like some kind of enemy whos here to denounce open carry.

Im sure you are a very respectful and upstanding person off the computer but here you havent been anything less than passively aggressive towards me solely based on my differing opinions. I feel that ive been respectful and just tried to give my opinion and youve been rather childish. If you feel my words are a waste of time perhaps you should have never chosen to waste yours by responding whatsoever and honestly i dont think the thread would be any worse because of it.

 

[Hronisiver]

That sounds like an excellent place to start. The post you responded to has words that I typed. Try responding to those without presenting hyperbolic restatements, and I will respond to that response of yours.

So then, maybe it would help if you were to defing what you meant by your statement. If my restatement for the sake of responding to your hyperbole missed your point, simply make a valid statement instead of overstating it to make it seem ridiculous.




Hyperbole. We haven't been discussing "walk around town with their .... arsenal tied to their body." That is your hyperbolic construct.
Good. I am glad you support legal behavior. You do understand that it is not likely legal to walk around town shaking two shotguns in the air, correct?

Neither do I condone that act. But, it is their Right to do such, unless it constitutes "hate speech."
Why not?
So, since it does not match what YOU feel is appropriate, you feel he shouldn't do it?


I thought you did not want to dictate what others do, as long as it is legal, yet here you do try to dictate what other do based upon whether you agree with it or not.

The "If its legal its regal" mentality has been yours not mine.... do you even know what you are arguing about anymore?!

You say in one sentence that you dont condone something then act like im some kind of rights-restricting monster because i feel the same way and dont want them to do it..... So you condone it but at the same time you want them to do it? Or you condone it and dont care if they do it...? But if you dont care then how can you not condone it?

Are you trying to tell me that, at the same time you dont condone something, you have no interest in people NOT doing what it is you dont condone..???

You dont condone what they do but you also dont care that they do it. am i getting this right?

 

[wrightme]

Each person dictates for themselves what they find to be innapropriate. You give off the vibe that you have no opinion regarding anything other than whether or not its legal and i just dont believe that.
if a person cannot have an opinion without being considered as having "dicated" what is or isnt appropriate then how are people ever going to get to the bottom of anything?

Sure I have an opinion.
But, when you take it to the level of labeling actions as innapropriate, you do show an attempt to dictate actions of others by virtue of demonizing them.

My opinion is just that, one opinion. I throw it out there into the sea of other opinions and hope ideas can be shared and new things learned, but you really seem adamant about only having YOUR opinion presented, even though you try just as hard to make it seem like im doing the same thing.

Um, what I have been doing is attempting to point out what you were doing.

 

[wrightme]

The "If its legal its regal" mentality has been yours not mine.... do you even know what you are arguing about anymore?!

No, I have not stated that. Once again, you present a hyperbolic overstatement of my posts. Try using the words I type, and not an overstated form of what you think I typed.

And, get your text out of my quoted text.

 

[wrightme]

Sir you are so defensive about this that you arent even letting reality in. I never said everyone on this site does what i claimed i saw a FEW people doing..... I am really not sure exactly why you are trying to stretch out and exaggerate what im saying to make me seem like some kind of enemy whos here to denounce open carry.
Im sure you are a very respectful and upstanding person off the computer but here you havent been anything less than passively aggressive towards me solely based on my differing opinions. I feel that ive been respectful and just tried to give my opinion and youve been rather childish. If you feel my words are a waste of time perhaps you should have never chosen to waste yours by responding whatsoever and honestly i dont think the thread would be any worse because of it.

That is exactly how you came across. As I mentioned earlier, if that is not the impression you want to present, you might need to step back a bit and rethink HOW you are presenting yourself.

 

[wrightme]

You say in one sentence that you dont condone something then act like im some kind of rights-restricting monster because i feel the same way and dont want them to do it..... So you condone it but at the same time you want them to do it? Or you condone it and dont care if they do it...? But if you dont care then how can you not condone it?

No, that is not accurate.
I do not condone the actions of Westboro. Neither do I condemn those actions, as long as they do not violate the Rights of others.

I do not condone Mapplethorpe, yet I support the Right of Free Speech, understanding that such support means allowing things that I find to be "icky."

Are you trying to tell me that, at the same time you dont condone something, you have no interest in people NOT doing what it is you dont condone..???

You dont condone what they do but you also dont care that they do it. am i getting this right?

No. I do not condone what they do, but I do not condemn what they do.

I can support the Right without supporting the act. But I would not be supporting the Right if I condemned the act.

 

[Gunslinger]

We welcome new members here. And you can post whatever opinion you have about any issue related to RKBA, but don't expect it to go unchallenged. Particularly if the inference of anti-OC is prevalent in the posting. Stick around for awhile and read what some of the more senior members consider on point. While you do that, and reply, we can also get a feel for who you are and the credibility of your opinions--even if we disagree. As an unknown, you won't get the benefit of the doubt on any forum, including this. As in life, the better known you are, the better known you become. writeme makes a lot of sense, imo, not just in this thread. And in life, shouting louder doesn't make your argument any more valid.

 

[Hronisiver]

No, I have not stated that. Once again, you present a hyperbolic overstatement of my posts. Try using the words I type, and not an overstated form of what you think I typed.

And, get your text out of my quoted text.

"Bring unlawful behavior to the light of day, I do. The rest is simply whether it is sensible to each person or not, and if it is lawful, becomes the choice of each individual. "

That is a direct quote from a post of yours on page 2. You bring unlawful behavior to the light of day and anything else thats legal becomes the choice of the individual, meaning that if its lawful then you dont care what someone does. Its been my argument that just because somthing IS legal doesnt make it "right". I.E. WBBC hate speech/free speech.

You have also stated that you dont condone certain activities but at the same time wouldnt want them to stop doing them because that would be considered "dictating" what they do, which only evil OC-hating spies like me, who open carry just to throw people off, would do.

And everything you said about using your words and not what i think you meant.... Take your own advice.

 

[wrightme]

You advocated the position that theres nothing wrong with bringing your children and family on a just-for-fun OC trip because it helps your image.

You do understand that many OC advocates here have barbeques, litter cleanups, Starbucks meets, dinners, specifically to OC "just-for-fun" with their families. Is that what you are talking about? Do you really think that this is a bad thing?

 

[wrightme]

"Bring unlawful behavior to the light of day, I do. The rest is simply whether it is sensible to each person or not, and if it is lawful, becomes the choice of each individual. "

That is a direct quote from a post of yours on page 2. You bring unlawful behavior to the light of day and anything else thats legal becomes the choice of the individual, meaning that if its lawful then you dont care what someone does. Its been my argument that just because somthing IS legal doesnt make it "right". I.E. WBBC hate speech/free speech.

Yet it isn't "wrong." It just isn't what you desire.

You have also stated that you dont condone certain activities but at the same time wouldnt want them to stop doing them because that would be considered "dictating" what they do, which only evil OC-hating spies like me, who open carry just to throw people off, would do.

Well, up to your hyperbole about "evil OC-hating.....yadayada", yes.

It isn't that "want them to stop" would be considered dictating. It is the same as my position on burning the American flag as a protest. I do not condone the activity, but I support the freedom of others to express themselves in that way, as much as I dislike the act itself.

And everything you said about using your words and not what i think you meant.... Take your own advice.

when you continue to use ridiculous hyperbole in your posts, I do tend to try and restate some of it to see if I am understanding what you are trying to say.