• 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.

Huff Post - Black Men Openly Carrying Guns in Holsters Will End Racial Profiling

Status
Not open for further replies.

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,107
Location
White Oak Plantation
...

"Do you support brandishing in the absence of an imminent and credible threat of grave injury to life or limb?"
...

Charles
Good question if both hold the same definition of brandishing. Or, that "brandishing" should even be a crime. Pointing a gun at me is not brandishing by any definition...except yours it seems.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,200
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
In eye95bagpiper's world, terrified soccer moms who decide that OCers are "threatening" them and therefore "brandishing" represent the height of reason.

Good thing this is a fantasy world, not worth discussing at all.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
In eye95bagpiper's world, terrified soccer moms who decide that OCers are "threatening" them and therefore "brandishing" represent the height of reason.
I will welcome citations to any of my posts where I make any such assertion. Otherwise, your interpretation of my position in is error.

And welcome back. Did you enjoy your short time away?

Charles
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
But But But, what have you done for me lately?:rolleyes:
A nice dodge, my brother.

But a dodge nonetheless. Do you intend to engage in real discussion? Or just sniping and snide bumper stickers?

You made an assertion regarding something you claim I posted. I've asked for a citation. Do you intend to honor forum etiquette by either providing it, or backing away from your assertion? Do you intend to answer direct questions?

For your convenience:

"Are you attempting to inject racism into a discussion that is not about racism? Is this an attempt to poison the well?"

And:

You claimed:

walkingwolf said:
NOW to get back to your claims that after the fact of being abused by a government agent one can become whole in the courts after they have been robbed, murdered, raped, lynched by a government agent.
In post 98 and 119 I asked you for a citation to back up this claim. This is now the third time I'm asking you for a citation. Do you intend to provide one or not?

Charles
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,912
Location
North Carolina
Ahhh the bumper sticker, sticker line~~not all of us feel like posting a thousand words to only say one thought. I would much rather read bumper stickers, or poke myself in the eye with a stick.

Do you even KNOW why bumber stickers were popular or even used?
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,107
Location
White Oak Plantation
Is pointing a gun at you a crime? I believe it is unless it is done in self defense against your criminal aggression.

Charles
I don't know about UT but here in MO we have a law that addresses your question.

Unlawful use of weapons--exceptions--penalties.

RSMo 571.030. 1. A person commits the crime of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly: ...

(4) Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or ...
Is the above excerpt "defining" brandishing? Subjective? Open to interpretation? Sure. Depends on how the observer defines brandishing I guess. Is pointing a gun at me a crime? Depends on the circumstances. This is what cops and prosecutors are supposed to figure out.

Some folks consider the folks back in 67 were brandishing their firearms, no big deal, I disagree. Some folks consider the folks in WA, more recently, were brandishing their firearms, again, no big deal, I disagree. I know what a threat to me and mine is when I see it. Brandishing is a completely subjective term. This is why I advocate that actual, quantifiable, harm done is what must be addressed by LE and judges. Maybe could've, or maybe would've, gives too much power to the state to decide what you are I should've believed.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,912
Location
North Carolina
I don't know about UT but here in MO we have a law that addresses your question.

Is the above excerpt "defining" brandishing? Subjective? Open to interpretation? Sure. Depends on how the observer defines brandishing I guess. Is pointing a gun at me a crime? Depends on the circumstances. This is what cops and prosecutors are supposed to figure out.

Some folks consider the folks back in 67 were brandishing their firearms, no big deal, I disagree. Some folks consider the folks in WA, more recently, were brandishing their firearms, again, no big deal, I disagree. I know what a threat to me and mine is when I see it. Brandishing is a completely subjective term. This is why I advocate that actual, quantifiable, harm done is what must be addressed by LE and judges. Maybe could've, or maybe would've, gives too much power to the state to decide what you are I should've believed.
+1
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,337
Location
Valhalla
Gentlemen (there do not appear to be any ladies present) please leave the personal "you said - I said" and pointless request for cites behind or take it to private conversation. You're clogging up the thread.
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,107
Location
White Oak Plantation
It is really simple to me. If a nitwit is "practicing" poor muzzle control I leave the area quickly nut I ain't gunna call the cops on him for brandishing. If anothe rcitizen does, I hope they feel better about themselves for criminalizing nitwittery. "No law against being stupid" as long as you do not actually harm anyone. But, some folks may hold a differing view of what actual harm is.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Some folks consider the folks back in 67 were brandishing their firearms, no big deal, I disagree. Some folks consider the folks in WA, more recently, were brandishing their firearms, again, no big deal, I disagree. I know what a threat to me and mine is when I see it. Brandishing is a completely subjective term. This is why I advocate that actual, quantifiable, harm done is what must be addressed by LE and judges. Maybe could've, or maybe would've, gives too much power to the state to decide what you are I should've believed.
So you're going to wait until there is quantifiable harm done to you before you act in self defense against an imminent, credible threat?

Does that mean you wait for the bullet to strike you? For the bullet to be shot at you? For your assailant to put his finger on the trigger? Or for him to point the gun at you while threatening you?

Do you wait for the aggressive pan handler to get within arms reach of you with his hands out of sight while ignoring your verbal commands to "back off" before you act in self defense?

I believe the right to swing a fist does not end at my nose; it ends at the point a reasonable man believes you intend to and are capable of hitting his nose.

Charles
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
It is really simple to me. If a nitwit is "practicing" poor muzzle control I leave the area quickly nut I ain't gunna call the cops on him for brandishing. If anothe rcitizen does, I hope they feel better about themselves for criminalizing nitwittery. "No law against being stupid" as long as you do not actually harm anyone. But, some folks may hold a differing view of what actual harm is.
Interesting point of view. I wonder how the self-professed "safety Nazis" feel about this point.

I do not feel compelled to allow dangerously stupid to run and the rest of the public out of areas we have a right to be in. So if a polite request to correct conduct doesn't solve the problem, then I'll leave and call it in.

For the record, I do the same thing with dangerous drivers, vehicles without working tail lights at night, and other hazards on the road. If I can safely alert the driver to his equipment failure I will do so. If he seems not to care, or if I can't safely alert him, I will call it in and let the police alert him.

In both of the above cases, failure to take some action can very foreseeably lead to innocent persons being injured or killed needlessly.

If we move from simple negligence into overt threats of violence, I will leave if at all possible, defend myself if unable to leave, and most certainly file a complaint. A criminal threatening with a gun over some political disagreement is no different in my book than a criminal threatening with a gun or knife in order to rob little old ladies.

Charles
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,107
Location
White Oak Plantation
So you're going to wait until there is quantifiable harm done to you before you act in self defense against an imminent, credible threat? ...
I haven't read your next response yet and I will not do so now after this statement. Didn't really read the rest of this post after this statement
I know what a threat to me and mine is when I see it.
Unfortunate, actually, you hold many valid views and most of them have a sound and logical premise. Then you pull crap like this.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
And you would have shot a dude back in 67, or 2014, in the WA statehouse, because he/they brandished a gun near you?
Not unless I believed he posed a threat to me. But had someone else--like a legislator--perceived a threat and drawn down on the jack hat trying to use his long gun to intimidate, I'd not have a problem with that.

I would have reported poor muzzle control had I seen it.

And I won't let some strung out meth head "begging" for money while his hands are concealed get inside the Tueller range in a parking garage.

Do you intend to wait until you are actually shot or stabbed before you take defensive action? Or is there conduct that you recognize as a credible threat of imminent harm prior to said harm actually taking place? That is the real question. After that, we are simply arguing about what a reasonable man would perceive as a threat. Or what a prosecutor, judge, and jury are likely to accept as "reasonable man" response. And I doubt we will agree on that point, so no need to belabor it.

Charles
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
I haven't read your next response yet and I will not do so now after this statement. Didn't really read the rest of this post after this statement

"I know what a threat to me and mine is when I see it. "

Unfortunate, actually, you hold many valid views and most of them have a sound and logical premise. Then you pull crap like this.
The quoted material you seem to be taking objection to is what YOU wrote in post 129.

So I have no idea what it is that is bothering you.

Sorry, but sometimes, excessive brevity lads to confusion.

Charles
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Ahhh the bumper sticker, sticker line~~not all of us feel like posting a thousand words to only say one thought. I would much rather read bumper stickers, or poke myself in the eye with a stick.
Then stop reading posts that exceed your attention span.

I won't try to force you to post more if you won't try to silence me.

We don't like each others' posting style. I get it. So let it go, brother. And stop making claims about my position which you are unable to back up.

Charles
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,912
Location
North Carolina
Then stop reading posts that exceed your attention span.

I won't try to force you to post more if you won't try to silence me.

We don't like each others' posting style. I get it. So let it go, brother. And stop making claims about my position which you are unable to back up.

Charles
Then STOP reading posts that upset you because they are not windbag posts. YOU are the one that keeps making the stupid comment on short to the point posts, YOU need to let it go.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top