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

[Hronisiver]

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 you argument any more valid.

i appreciate the honest and helpful comment, it helps a person know a little bit more about how things are run.

But at the same time, its scary to think that people will follow the person with the biggest post count, not the person whos opinion makes most since.... A persons credible opinion IS their credibility. We should go by what makes sense, not by what everyone else says makes sense.

Also any "anti-OC" inference isnt intended because i open carry more than i conceal carry. It just seems like its "all or nothing" on this board, you are either 110% with the crowd or the war sirens start sounding off.

I dont mind being challenged at all, thats how new ideas and opinions are formed and thats a good thing, i just ask that everyone stays civil, theres no reason to get bent out of shape over a few opposing views.

 

[wrightme]

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.

You do understand that this does NOT go against the purpose of the first amendment, right?

 

[wrightme]

i appreciate the honest and helpful comment, it helps a person know a little bit more about how things are run.

But at the same time, its scary to think that people will follow the person with the biggest post count, not the person whos opinion makes most since.... A persons credible opinion IS their credibility. We should go by what makes sense, not by what everyone else says makes sense.

On that I do agree. If an opinion makes sense, it does show as more credible.

Also any "anti-OC" inference isnt intended because i open carry more than i conceal carry. It just seems like its "all or nothing" on this board, you are either 110% with the crowd or the war sirens start sounding off.

I dont mind being challenged at all, thats how new ideas and opinions are formed and thats a good thing, i just ask that everyone stays civil, theres no reason to get bent out of shape over a few opposing views.

Correct, there is no reason to do so. You seem to do so, judging by your posts so far.

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.

You entered this thread, appearing to be "bent out of shape" over how others act, and with opinions that differ from yours.

 

[Hronisiver]

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

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.

Do you condone murder? Is murder "wrong"? Or is it just "not what you desire?"

I dont desire country music to be played. Do i want people to stop playing it when im around? Wouldnt mind if it stopped but i dont expect them to turn it off because this is a situation that is mostly trivial.

I dont desire people going out and open carrying as a HOBBY so that they get an edgy video to put on their youtube channel. Do i want them to stop? Yes because i believe it sets back the cause and paints open carry in a bad light.

So in the end if you are telling me that simply because i want something that i dont agree with to stop that im trying to "dictate" then i guess you are correct. Id rather that people dont do idiotic things with firearms that might put and other people in danger, as well as make other gun carrying folk look irresponsible and childish through stereotyping.

You realize you have said the word "hyperbole" about 40 times so far? Is that the new popular temr on this board now? Can you hit me with a few "non-sequitor" and "strawman" comments and spice it up a bit?

You could have just assumed everything ive said is hypothetical and still proven me wrong but you just have comment after comment of "Oh thats hyperbole/not cited/probably not going to happen so im not responding."

 

[wrightme]

Do you condone murder? Is murder "wrong"? Or is it just "not what you desire?"

Murder is a crime. Hyperbole.

I dont desire country music to be played. Do i want people to stop playing it when im around? Wouldnt mind if it stopped but i dont expect them to turn it off because this is a situation that is mostly trivial.

I dont desire people going out and open carrying as a HOBBY so that they get an edgy video to put on their youtube channel. Do i want them to stop? Yes because i believe it sets back the cause and paints open carry in a bad light.

So in the end if you are telling me that simply because i want something that i dont agree with to stop that im trying to "dictate" then i guess you are correct. Id rather that people dont do idiotic things with firearms that might put and other people in danger, as well as make other gun carrying folk look irresponsible and childish through stereotyping.

So, if someone carries a firearm for reasons you do not agree with, does that equate to "idiotic things with firearms?"
Or did you not intend for those two sentences in the same paragraph to be connected?

Doing something legal does not equate to "do[ing] idiotic things with firearms."

You realize you have said the word "hyperbole" about 40 times so far? Is that the new popular temr on this board now? Can you hit me with a few "non-sequitor" and "strawman" comments and spice it up a bit?

Each time you overstate something to make it look ridiculous, you are likely to see that word in a response from me.

You could have just assumed everything ive said is hypothetical and still proven me wrong but you just have comment after comment of "Oh thats hyperbole/not cited/probably not going to happen so im not responding."

You could try to create hypothetical examples that are not overstated to the point of ridiculous, and then you will cease seeing a response about hyperbole.

You do not see how "waving two shotguns in the air" is hyperbole? (as just one example).


Look at it this way. If you have to grossly exaggerate your hypothetical examples so they look ridiculous, maybe it is because if you do not, they look like normal behavior.

 

[Hronisiver]

On that I do agree. If an opinion makes sense, it does show as more credible.


Correct, there is no reason to do so. You seem to do so, judging by your posts so far.

You entered this thread, appearing to be "bent out of shape" over how others act, and with opinions that differ from yours.

No im sorry but you are incorrect. As i have clarified for you previously, (you must have skipped over it?) its not the idea of open carrying with ones family that disturbs me, its the act of teaching your young children to activate a video camera so that when you get a police response on an attention getting OC they can pull out a camera and record it.

So again, to clarify and as not to include any dreaded trendy hyperbole, I have read responses on this forum of a few people (not the entire board) who explain how they will be going to an store or area they know to be anti-gun just to "test the waters" (a phrase ive seen used a few times by those few peoples). I dont agree with this action and i have previously explained very clearly why. I dont agree with planning a family trip around your pistol and expecting your child to record you when if you get hassled.

Once again if you refuse to believe what ive said or take any of it as fact then no worries. Lets just assume its all hypothetical and then give me your response to it, instead of bowing out of it and not responding. Thanks.

 

[wrightme]

No im sorry but you are incorrect. As i have clarified for you previously, (you must have skipped over it?) its not the idea of open carrying with ones family that disturbs me, its the act of teaching your young children to activate a video camera so that when you get a police response on an attention getting OC they can pull out a camera and record it.

And as I have asked before, WHY does that disturb you?

 

[wrightme]

So again, to clarify and as not to include any dreaded trendy hyperbole, I have read responses on this forum of a few people (not the entire board) who explain how they will be going to an store or area they know to be anti-gun just to "test the waters" (a phrase ive seen used a few times by those few peoples). I dont agree with this action and i have previously explained very clearly why. I dont agree with planning a family trip around your pistol and expecting your child to record you when if you get hassled.

"very clearly?" Which part, where you believe the child will be shot?

In other words, you take it to the extreme case, to make it scary.

 

[Hronisiver]

Murder is a crime. Hyperbole.
So, if someone carries a firearm for reasons you do not agree with, does that equate to "idiotic things with firearms?"
Or did you not intend for those two sentences in the same paragraph to be connected?

Doing something legal does not equate to "do[ing] idiotic things with firearms."

Each time you overstate something to make it look ridiculous, you are likely to see that word in a response from me.



You could try to create hypothetical examples that are not overstated to the point of ridiculous, and then you will cease seeing a response about hyperbole.

You do not see how "waving two shotguns in the air" is hyperbole? (as just one example).

All you need to be concerned about, with your apparent view of things, if whether or not its legal. You just got done saying that i should be concerned about bringing to light thiings that are illegal and that anything else was an individuals own choice. You, once again, bow out of the situation by saying "hyperbole" and slinking away....

Humor me by assuming that everything is hypothetical and that we are always speaking in hypotheticals. Always. This way you have no excuse to bow out from making a point or answering a question based on your percieved view of the question.

Youd almost think that thinking outside the box were illegal. I wonder if they thought outside the box when coming up with a plan for this new country we all cherish? Nah. They looked at the rules and laws of their homeland and decided to just copy it because it made so much sense, right...?


Look at it this way. If you have to grossly exaggerate your hypothetical examples so they look ridiculous, maybe it is because if you do not, they look like normal behavior.

Once again, why are you even concerned about any level of exxageration? In your cut and dry world it doesnt matter how exagerated anything is, its either legal or illegal and you base your views off of that. So whats your point here? Are you not able to tackle these situations because its not something thats been beaten to death already for you to refer back to and gather the best opinions from the best posters?

Clear your head, dont worry about what everyone around you thinks and use your own brain and develop your own opinions.

If i knew that your next post was going to be 4 paragraphs complaining of hyperbole then id stay for more but its a little annoying arguing with someone who uses other peoples views as his starting point.

Please do me a favor and every time you say hyperbole make it blue so i can see it easier.

 

[wrightme]

Im certainly not in a "tizzy" about people putting their rights to use, but im not a fan of people standing behind those rights and using them for reasons they were put there for. For instance, shouting "BECAUSE ITS MY RIGHT ITS MY 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHT!!!!" in a cops face just because he said "excuse me sir i noticed you were carrying a firearm, do you mind if a see your ID?"

Do you have an example of this happening? Or was this an overstated hypotheticial case?

BTW, absent statute requiring an OCer to present an ID, the response should have been "No, I do not consent." Or, "Yes, I do mind."

 

[Hronisiver]

"very clearly?" Which part, where you believe the child will be shot?

In other words, you take it to the extreme case, to make it scary.

I suppose i take it to the extreme in the same way that you refuse to even open your mind to think about the possibilities.

You think its could never ever possibly happen? Five officers with their guns drawn on an OCer could never happen? That OCer could never have a daughter with him? Its impossible that he would have told her to record him in this kind of situation? Its impossible that she pulls out a black camera and is shot?

You might call it hyperbole just to PONDER it, but i call it completer and utter ignorance to just pass it off because you havent been given a cite of it hapening before.

 

[wrightme]

Once again, why are you even concerned about any level of exxageration? In your cut and dry world it doesnt matter how exagerated anything is, its either legal or illegal and you base your views off of that. So whats your point here? Are you not able to tackle these situations because its not something thats been beaten to death already for you to refer back to and gather the best opinions from the best posters?

Because arguing against the reality, while more difficult, is more accurate. Arguing against exaggerated examples is simple to do, but inaccurate.

Clear your head, dont worry about what everyone around you thinks and use your own brain and develop your own opinions.

I do such. I develop my own opinions, and in my opinion, you like to exaggerate examples so they are simpler to argue against.
"legal is regal?" Come on now, I did not even come close to stating that one, did I?

If i knew that your next post was going to be 4 paragraphs complaining of hyperbole then id stay for more but its a little annoying arguing with someone who uses other peoples views as his starting point.

Do you feel it is valid to argue against exaggerated examples?
I do not.

Please do me a favor and every time you say hyperbole make it blue so i can see it easier.

Once you cease placing your text inside my quotes that you cite, I might consider it.

 

[wrightme]

I suppose i take it to the extreme in the same way that you refuse to even open your mind to think about the possibilities.

You think its could never ever possibly happen? Five officers with their guns drawn on an OCer could never happen? That OCer could never have a daughter with him? Its impossible that he would have told her to record him in this kind of situation? Its impossible that she pulls out a black camera and is shot?

You might call it hyperbole just to PONDER it, but i call it completer and utter ignorance to just pass it off because you havent been given a cite of it hapening before.

No, I call it hyperbole to jump to that level at the beginning of such a discussion, unless there is a rational reason to present it.

 

[wrightme]

All you need to be concerned about, with your apparent view of things, if whether or not its legal. You just got done saying that i should be concerned about bringing to light thiings that are illegal and that anything else was an individuals own choice.

Don't you feel that this is valid?
If it is legal (all you need to be concerned about), it isn't necessary to bring it to light.

You, once again, bow out of the situation by saying "hyperbole" and slinking away....

First off, I have not been "slinking away." I have been pointing out that your exaggerated examples simply are not valid for discussion.

Humor me by assuming that everything is hypothetical and that we are always speaking in hypotheticals. Always. This way you have no excuse to bow out from making a point or answering a question based on your percieved view of the question.

Why? This started with you citing the Costco/Scott case, as an example of OC ending in a shooting. We now are at "it is all hypoteticals?"
And, you were specific about pointing out the actions of other OCers, "in this very forum." Was that just hypthetical?

Youd almost think that thinking outside the box were illegal. I wonder if they thought outside the box when coming up with a plan for this new country we all cherish? Nah. They looked at the rules and laws of their homeland and decided to just copy it because it made so much sense, right...?

You do not need to exaggerate to think outside the box. And, what does that bit about the rules and laws of a new country have to do with this discussion anyway?

 

[wrightme]

"A right is a right"..... Its my right to carry a firearm and its my right to say what i wish and have any opinions or ideas that i wish. Does that make it the right thing to do for me to walk down the street back and forth calling people every rude, racist, sexist, discriminatory thing i can think of while im waving two shotguns around in the air? ITs probably my right to do so in many places but it doesnt make it ok, coming from a common sense standpoint.

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.

Given your example included "calling people every rude, racist, sexist, discriminatory thing..." while doing so, I am of the opinion that it would be considered "doing it to instill fear or threaten anyone."
But, I did not state it was illegal. I stated that "I highly doubt that such action can be considered legal."

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.

Why? Just because I COULD possibly do such does not mean that I would choose to do such.

Besides, you did not describe a family trip to Walmart with two shotguns. You described a much more threatening action than that.

 

[wrightme]

A man is strapping a firearm onto his hip and bringing his family to a location where he knows he is not welcome, in an attempt to stir the pot and get attention. Are you in disagreement that people who have OCed have been shot and killed or or do you require cites for that as well?

http://snardfarker.ning.com/forum/topics/man-killed-by-police-in-costco

A very sad case of people on both ends not acting intelligently that ended with this mans death. His girlfriend was right beside him the entire time and was also at risk of being shot.

Now take that type of situation and add to the fact that some people go out of their way to find places that are anti-gun AND they bring their family along for "moral support" and youve just got a bad situation on your hands.

Out children should be educated about the world not put smack dab in the middle of their parents opinions and politics.

Do you really want to read about some little girl being shot because she pulled a video camera out of her pocket to record her daddy being stopped by the police.

I think a lot of people probably immediately want to argue that its not the dads or daughters fault and the cop pulled the trigger etc etc.... Me, id rather the hypothetical little girl still be alive instead of us getting another hypothetical scapegoat to argue about.

Scott was not OC. Furthermore, he was under the influence of drugs. Using the example of his behavior to make your point about OCers making trouble is horribly off-point.Who on this board has posted about having done the behaviors that you are decrying? I will, right along side you, decry claims of deliberately setting up the police, being rude to them for rudeness sake, or deliberately carrying where one knows carry is not welcome. The folks here hardly do any of those things at all, and you will see it criticized here when someone boasts of such behavior.

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.

The progression you presented it in did give the impression that you presented it as an example of "OC gone bad." eye95 got that impression from your post, and so did I.

And, eye95 did NOT try to imply that Scott was on "'drugs' in the criminal way," but only stated that he was "under the influence of drugs" which is completely accurate. There have been quite the discussion in OCDO about that case.

 

[Jim675]

Welcome Hronisiver. Perhaps I can put this in a different light for you. Do you support law and order?

Would you support police waiting down the street from a bar at closing time to catch drunk drivers? How about a prostitution sting? Or a wiretap to catch a mafia boss (or an Illinois Governor) committing crimes?

I'm guessing you would support people going out of their way to catch law breakers.

Does the color of clothes matter in any of the above scenarios? What if the person committing the crime was wearing blue, and a nicely contrasting badge?

When police commit crimes like using their badge/gun/position to force you to change your lawful behavior then the police are criminals.
When they detain you for no reason beyond an OC'd handgun they are criminals.
When they then unlawfully seize your identity papers and your handgun they are criminals.

Do you support criminals?

The First Amendment is not needed if we all thought, spoke, dressed and acted in a similar manner. It does not take much courage to yell "Vote for Obama" in a room full of Democrats. It takes a great deal of courage to be the first black person to openly defy convention and Jim Crow laws and sit in the front of the bus.

OC in many areas of the country is (rightfully) quite tame now. But not everywhere, and not all the time.

The more experienced members here have heard many examples of such abuse. Often happening to people they consider respected friends and colleagues.

If the neighbor's kids picked on your son one day after school you might counsel patience and understanding. What would you do after the 100th time it happened? After you've spoken to the parents politely and explained the situation and they said "Tough ****", we support our kid. Your kid was asking for it because he he didn't do what our son told him to. "

Supporting bullying behavior by ignorant or bullying police will be quickly spotted and denounced here. There's a lot of well-informed and experienced readers who pore over these words daily.

Over and over we see folks come here with an attitude like yours and slowly become more understanding as you gain empathy for the other team.
Good luck.