• 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.

Comment on Grapeshot words of wisdom. (opencarry of AR right after SandyHook

jonjon_jon

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
216
Location
Manchester Maine

SPOProds

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
464
Location
Orono, ME
In before this is locked.

People are too insensitive in this day and age.

Would you want me to not drive a car after a madman runs a school bus full of kids off the road? Then why not open carry after an incident like this?

The Newtown shooter also used a Glock and Sig. Should i not OC a Glock or Sig and only carry an XD after an incident like this?

So why not OC a long gun? To appease other people's irrational fears?

The "don't OC an AR" argument is the same one the antis make about OCing in general.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Rights are rights are rights are rights.

So, our AR Santa didn't coordinate his action with the rest of us so we could all be comfortable, approve, and coordinate against a possible police campaign to revise gun laws? So, what?

In case nobody noticed, the anti-gunners don't need an excuse to try to infringe. Doing something they can latch onto like our Santa is a nullity. The bad guy at the school had two semi-auto pistols with him; if anybody had complained about the Santa OCer carrying pistol, you can bet the anti-gunner cops would have used that.

Also, look for the omissions in the news story that tell the police lie. You know damned good and well that cops can and do judge people by more than just the words they use. If the Santa OCer had been acting nutty, or fiddling with the gun, or seemed drugged, or whatever, you know the cops woulda hauled him in. In that they let him go, you can tell all they had, literally, was a guy walking down the street with an AR, who apparently knew his rights and exercised them. I'm betting he exercised them politely, or the cops woulda used his hostility as a pretext to question him further or actually detain him. Also, notice it was Christmas eve. There are no schools open on Christmas eve. Nor on Christmas day. Probably not until Jan 2. So, what was this AR Santa going to be doing with this AR? The cops knew he was likely an OCer in the first minute of the encounter. But, oh no. We don't hear their reports of how they evaluated his behavior; we hear subtle whining that amounts to the Fourth Amendment being too stringent whenever a different somebody carries a similar gun in another state.

The top cops are essentially saying they want to make it easy to harass OCers by changing gun laws, or chill the desire to OC altogether--for their own benefit.

Rights are rights are rights are rights.

The thing to do is launch a campaign ridiculing the top cops and exposing their specious arguments.
 
Last edited:

RLTW!

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2012
Messages
13
Location
Portland
I couldn't agree with Grapeshot more, what a stupid and thoughtless act right after the killing of all those children.

|||||||||
vvvvvvvv

Rights are rights are rights are rights.

If the gun-control lobbies are successful in banning/restricting weapons used in less than 3% of firearms crime you can bet they'll soon go after the ones used in the majority of firearms crime.

But I'll make you an offer, JonJon_Jon.. I will argue and fight for all of your rights even if you won't do the same for me -- because it's the right thing to do.
 

Hozed

New member
Joined
May 9, 2011
Messages
8
Location
Maine
We have the right to do it, and we should fight to do it. But doing what he did sets us back, it did not help us fight for our rights. When we start to lose the general public supporting guns rights, thats when we lose the right to have them. And doing what he did put a huge blackeye on open carry in maine. So much so, that Im fairly certain his actions alone is what sparked the meeting police will have about stopping open carry.
 

MainelyGlock

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
615
Location
Portland, ME
The thread I started about this "incident" got locked because, even though I specifically said I was focusing on the police response to an OC'er, the person happened to be carrying a long gun and I apparently violated the rules.

So, watch what you say I guess. This will probably get locked for even mentioning it.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
People need to learn a lesson from Sandy Hook and its not that guns are evil.

Its that the gov't cannot protect you or you kids; only citizens can do this.

No one has pointed a finger at Newtown and said ... why did you not buy a better door?

Malloy said he shot a entry-way but his staff has no idea what this meant...its pure crapolla.

Towns were put on notice after the CO incident and have done very little to affect security...they would rather have kids die for their political causes.

Improvement in responses are just that responses, not prevention.

And 1000 kids could die .. the 2nd amendment still means what it says
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
We have the right to do it, and we should fight to do it. But doing what he did sets us back, it did not help us fight for our rights. When we start to lose the general public supporting guns rights, thats when we lose the right to have them. And doing what he did put a huge blackeye on open carry in maine. So much so, that Im fairly certain his actions alone is what sparked the meeting police will have about stopping open carry.

NO!! Blaming him for the anti-gunner's reaction is like blaming a woman for being raped.

If there is any "set back" from this, it will be the anti-gunners who set us back.

Stop blaming people who are exercising enumerated rights--it only helps the anti-gunners. Please quit doing their self-appointed job for them. The correct target is the people who would take away or diminish a right.

Over the years of this forum, one thing we've clearly learned is that freedom means anybody and everybody is going to exercise their rights. And, not in a coordinated fashion. Some are smart, some are dull. Some are sophisticated, some are rednecks. The solution is to be ready to counter-attack when the anti-gunners make a move, not complain that the guy who was well within his rights was wrong.

Like I said, counter-attack. All the Maine guys should be ridiculing the cops and the whiners with letters to the editor, comments sections of blogs, letters to state legislators, etc.
 
Last edited:

sharkey

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
1,064
Location
Arizona
We are embroiled in a public relations battle for the hearts and minds of John Q. Public. The idea is not to prove that we can do something of this nature "because we can", especially not now after the recent events in CT. http://www.kjonline.com/news/Police-chiefs-taking-aim-at-Maines-open-carry-gun-law.html I couldn't agree with Grapeshot more, what a stupid and thoughtless act right after the killing of all those children.

Nice answer.

What you propose is that people voluntarily give up their rights so they're not forced too?

What's really on my mind.

**** PC, PR and John Q. public. Rights are moved forward by taking action, not being pussies. You owe most of your rights to people who said enough is enough and pushed the envelope. In fact you owe many rights to criminals.
 

boyscout399

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
905
Location
Lyman, Maine
We have the right to do it, and we should fight to do it. But doing what he did sets us back, it did not help us fight for our rights. When we start to lose the general public supporting guns rights, thats when we lose the right to have them. And doing what he did put a huge blackeye on open carry in maine. So much so, that Im fairly certain his actions alone is what sparked the meeting police will have about stopping open carry.

If you have a right, but exercising that right causes people to take that right away, then did you really have the right to do it at all?
 

jonjon_jon

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
216
Location
Manchester Maine
The thread I started about this "incident" got locked because, even though I specifically said I was focusing on the police response to an OC'er, the person happened to be carrying a long gun and I apparently violated the rules.

So, watch what you say I guess. This will probably get locked for even mentioning it.

I sent Grapeshot a PM inviting him to lock my post if he felt it was out of line when I posted. I suspect he's enjoying the debate on my comment as I am! Stay on topic and respect other users and enjoy.

http://www.kjonline.com/news/policewanttougherlaw_2013-01-04.html
 
Last edited:

sharkey

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
1,064
Location
Arizona
Is GS Jeff Weinstein? Otherwise I have no idea what he said that you agreed with.
 

MamaLiberty

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
894
Location
Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
If you have a right, but exercising that right causes people to take that right away, then did you really have the right to do it at all?

Nothing and nobody can eliminate a "right." You have a right to life, liberty and property. This includes having the tools with which to defend those rights. If someone can actually "take that right away," it was never a right, but a privilege.

Our natural and imperishable right is to LIFE and LIBERTY, not just to posession of guns. The natural and inherent right to life and self defense predates the "constitution" by as long as human beings have existed. Don't get hung up on "gun rights."
 

MainelyGlock

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
615
Location
Portland, ME
If you have a right, but exercising that right causes people to take that right away, then did you really have the right to do it at all?

Yes, but you're not exercising them smartly. I'm not a fan of OC'ing long guns simply because the general public barely seems to be able to handle handguns. An AR is just adding shock value to open carrying, which is counter productive. That being said, I respect a persons right to carry whatever they like (legally).


I sent Grapeshot a PM inviting him to lock my post if he felt it was out of line when I posted. I suspect he's enjoying the debate on my comment as I am! Stay on topic and respect other users and enjoy.

http://www.kjonline.com/news/policewanttougherlaw_2013-01-04.html


Are you implying that I'm not doing either of those things? Just curious.

I posted a link to that article in the Maine forum. Learned that it's not the first time they've met for this reason, but they now have some ammunition for wanting tougher laws.
 

sharkey

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
1,064
Location
Arizona
Nothing and nobody can eliminate a "right." You have a right to life, liberty and property. This includes having the tools with which to defend those rights. If someone can actually "take that right away," it was never a right, but a privilege.

Our natural and imperishable right is to LIFE and LIBERTY, not just to posession of guns. The natural and inherent right to life and self defense predates the "constitution" by as long as human beings have existed. Don't get hung up on "gun rights."

Then let's just admit we have no rights. Semantics, ugh.

All the above can be taken away regardless of your right to them. If they were taken then your rights meant squat anyway.

Some rights are privileges actually, like the right to vote.
 

Hozed

New member
Joined
May 9, 2011
Messages
8
Location
Maine
If you have a right, but exercising that right causes people to take that right away, then did you really have the right to do it at all?

Timing is everything. Walking around with an AR on your back, right after 20 kids get blasted by one is not smart. Rights or not, the timing was terrible.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Timing is everything. Walking around with an AR on your back, right after 20 kids get blasted by one is not smart. Rights or not, the timing was terrible.

So, what are you going to do about it? Huh? C'mon. Lets hear it?

The fact of the matter is nobody else can stop them. They're free men and women. That's the point--they can do what they want; and (big surprise here)--some of them will actually do it.

So, how you gonna stop them? Or, do you plan on lending indirect support to anti-gunners by saying he shouldn't do it, and shouldn't have done it?

You can't stop them. If all you did was vigorously defend his right to do it while not bellyaching about his doing it, you'd end up in the same place. Complaining that he shouldn't have done it only plays into the hands of the anti-gunners. Nevermind, the damned police making a play for chipping away at the Fourth Amendment in this particular case.

So, quit it already. Rights are rights are rights are rights. As already mentioned, if he's not supposed to do it after a tragedy because government might infringe the right, then it wasn't really a right after all.



I am reminded we've been all through this before. Not just with VA Tech, but with OC in general. How many times in our early years did we hear advice not to rock the boat by OCing? From so-called pro-gun people who preferred CC and not stirring people up, and not scaring people, and not scaring kids and not....blah, blah, blah.
 
Last edited:

boyscout399

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
905
Location
Lyman, Maine
Timing is everything. Walking around with an AR on your back, right after 20 kids get blasted by one is not smart. Rights or not, the timing was terrible.

Considering that 12000 people are murdered with firearms yearly, that averages 33 people per day murdered. When is the "proper timing" to exercise a right? I'd say that right after a tragedy is the perfect time to exercise your right to carry in whatever form because that's the most likely time to encounter a copycat murderer.
 

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
Well,,,

Considering that 12000 people are murdered with firearms yearly, that averages 33 people per day murdered. When is the "proper timing" to exercise a right? I'd say that right after a tragedy is the perfect time to exercise your right to carry in whatever form because that's the most likely time to encounter a copycat murderer.

So maybe I can agree with yur basic premis,,, BUT
Im pretty sure 12,000 people are NOT murdered with guns yearly.... maybe 3,000.
 
Top