• 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.

So now I'm an anti

Brace

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Messages
183
Location
Colorado
Letting a gun flag someone is always sketchy and when the trigger isn't covered it's negligent.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
No, you didn't call me anti. I've no issue with your posts.

And the bolded part was a good point, which I accepted (I dropped that line of thought as invalid and focused on social pressure). Discussion is great, and what is discussion without disagreement?

SOCIAL PRESSURE? That is exactly what got us to where we are now, it is amazing how those spouting this poop do not see how outrageous it is. Any doubt you are a anti has just been clarified, by YOU.

Triggers are not pressed accidently, they are pressed negligently. And far more incidents happen with handguns, and you still have not posted one legitimate incident of a OC LG discharge without the presence of a finger on the trigger. Your whole line is nothing but hoplophobia.
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
I've always thought of myself as very "pro", as there isn't a single gun law I can think of which I support.

However, apparently, because I choose to voice displeasure over guys who can't be bothered to ensure that their slung rifles are pointing in a safe direction (i.e. not sideways at passersby), I'm an anti who "spouts the same rhetoric as the Brady Bunch".

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?117889-NOT-the-way-to-Open-Carry/page7

Ordinarily I'd take this with a grain of salt, but by the sampling so far, nobody agrees with me, and the ratio of folks calling me an anti is 100%.

I sincerely don't mean to whine over a disagreement, but... Clearly, if I'm an anti I don't belong on this site, now or at any point in the future. If the community considers me an anti, then it must be so.

So, unless anybody can be bothered to convince me otherwise, I'm going to take another hiatus from this site, one likely to be permanent this time, given the circumstances.

Sorry for being such a little girl, but I have invested quite a lot of my time and energy into this movement (and this forum), and if I don't belong then I really need to place my energies elsewhere.

Self esteem or maybe more correctly belief in one's principles should not be subject to a democratic process.

See no reason for you to leave, every reason for you to stay.
 

nobama

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2009
Messages
756
Location
, ,
I didnt read the OPs first response but to me its that he was complaining about OCing a long gun and the muzzle was not pointed in a very safe direction? If this is true, I would have to agree. The first and very most important thing to "gun safety" is muzzle control is it not? Why all the negative responses to common sense?
 

Dave_pro2a

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
2,132
Location
, ,
I didnt read the OPs first response but to me its that he was complaining about OCing a long gun and the muzzle was not pointed in a very safe direction? If this is true, I would have to agree. The first and very most important thing to "gun safety" is muzzle control is it not? Why all the negative responses to common sense?

Because starting a new thread about an existing thread is drama queen behavior -- and border line troll behavior.

And the OP endorsed a criminal solution to a 2A issue -- where the actions had no true injured party.
 

papa bear

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
2,222
Location
mayberry, nc
Ive always considered everybody that wants to restrict gun ownership and carry to be ANTI

i also consider people like you and EYE that resort to name calling, and calling others ideas and opinions derogatory names, are definitely ANTIs. progressives in the least
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
Marshall, I watched the video, read most of the posts in this thread, and only read a handful of posts in the thread you linked.

I've always felt the same as what you described. You pretty much summed up my feelings exactly within your first 2 posts in that thread. I've seen people carrying rifles many times in videos and pictures, and have seen people carrying in such a way that their rifles constantly sweep people, and have thought to myself exactly what you described. Other times, they've carried in a way that their rifles are pointed straight toward the ground. Cool, no weird feelings or holding my breath while someone is looking down their barrel in shock.

One guy that open carries his rifle here in Texas actually bought a new sling to increase muzzle control and keep it pointed straight down as a result of community feedback on his videos. I think that exactly - that sort of feedback and social pressure, and that sort of result - are exactly what you're advocating. I can hardly see that as anti.

No, you are not "anti" by any stretch of the imagination. Well, maybe WalkingWolf has found a way to stretch the imagination that far. Perhaps with the assistance of mushrooms. But I can't.
 

georg jetson

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
2,416
Location
Slidell, Louisiana
Because starting a new thread about an existing thread is drama queen behavior -- and border line troll behavior.

And the OP endorsed a criminal solution to a 2A issue -- where the actions had no true injured party.

Starting a new thread about a topic divergent from the original thread is proper respect of the original thread. Change the topic, change the thread... more of us should be so disciplined.

How did the OP endorse a criminal solution to a 2A issue -- where the actions had no true injured party?
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
Because starting a new thread about an existing thread is drama queen behavior -- and border line troll behavior.

It's the social lounge. No big deal.

And the OP endorsed a criminal solution to a 2A issue -- where the actions had no true injured party.

Not quite.

First of all, I did not make prescriptive statements – I merely entertained a hypothetical.

I did say – initially – that as a juror I would be inclined to convict over a hypothetical brandishing charge. When I said this, I was thinking of an ideal jury situation, wherein a concomitantly small amercement might result from this minor transgression – and, incidentally, I was imagining a specific victim making a specific claim of tortious negligence, not a state-sponsored criminal prosecution.

Of course, we don't have an ideal jury situation, in today's courts this would be a criminal matter, and the power of the state in criminal cases is far more than a small fine. My mistake was to articulate a hypothetical far divorced from practical reality in the context of that practical reality.

This is why I not only neglected to defend that statement, I have fairly explicitly recanted it since. As I've said, social pressure should be the response.

A knee-jerk reaction, subsequently disavowed, is an error, not an "endorsement".

While it's my own fault for making a pronouncement without due reflection, and I can't fault you for interpreting it at face value, you're mistaken if you believe what you ascribe to me to be, in truth, "endorsed" by myself. Again, I am the final arbiter of what I endorse, not you.

I do not endorse state-sponsored criminal prosecution over such an "offense", regardless of what hypotheticals I may have entertained.
 
Last edited:

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
Starting a new thread about a topic divergent from the original thread is proper respect of the original thread. Change the topic, change the thread... more of us should be so disciplined.

How did the OP endorse a criminal solution to a 2A issue -- where the actions had no true injured party?

In my initial post in that threat, I entertained a hypothetical without framing it in the proper context, reasonably giving the impression that I favor criminal prosecution – when in truth, I do not (and did not).

However, I've been quite clear since then exactly what my position is: we should apply social pressure to these folks, but not any sort of legal action.
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Social pressure leads to legal pressure, who does not understand this fact. Either a person supports all rights or they don't, not only those that favor their own bias or fears.

Both the Brady Bunch and MOMS exert social pressure, go figure...
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Social pressure leads to legal pressure, who does not understand this fact. Either a person supports all rights or they don't, not only those that favor their own bias or fears.

Both the Brady Bunch and MOMS exert social pressure, go figure...

As does VCDL, GRNC and OCDO and these are most effective too.
icon14.png
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
As does VCDL, GRNC and OCDO and these are most effective too.
icon14.png

Exactly my point ;) Attitudes "social pressure" have affects on laws, if some adopt a social stigma it becomes social pressure eventually it becomes law. Supporting restricting others rights by any means is contrary to the constitution. Especially when there are no facts to back up these fears for "social pressure".

Morality laws are the result of social pressure, as is most if not all gun control laws. Thank God for those organizations that use social pressure to reverse this trend. Thank God for citizens who understand that majority social pressure leads to fascism.
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
Is OCDO anti for only advocating the carry of a properly holstered handgun? I should be able to tie a shoestring around the trigger guard and skip down the street bouncing the handgun like a yo-yo, right? If OCDO doesn't condone and encourage this behavior, they must be anti. I mean, it has a firing pin block, what could possibly go wrong?

You're twisting promotion of safety into interference with rights. Still stretching the truth.
 
Last edited:

Dave_pro2a

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
2,132
Location
, ,
Social pressure leads to legal pressure, who does not understand this fact. Either a person supports all rights or they don't, not only those that favor their own bias or fears.

Both the Brady Bunch and MOMS exert social pressure, go figure...


Supporting a Right /= approving or condoning a specific behavior
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Is OCDO anti for only advocating the carry of a properly holstered handgun? I should be able to tie a shoestring around the trigger guard and skip down the street bouncing the handgun like a yo-yo, right? If OCDO doesn't condone and encourage this behavior, they must be anti. I mean, it has a firing pin block, what could possibly go wrong?

You're twisting promotion of safety into interference with rights. Still stretching the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0Fn_EzpHFk

Like that one above lol?

The OP never said the guy could not carry ... just wished that he was being safer-er with the firearm. A discussion of safety was my take on the previous posting thread of the OP here; not a discussion of carry or RKBA.

I'm sure if someone pointed a loaded gun at a person's head (even w/o a finger near the trigger) a concern may be vocalized by the person whose head it now being pointed at. (What if it was a cop pointing a gun at your head .. lalala )
 
Top