Minnesota is an open-carry state as well. While I do carry it is never 'open'. The soccer moms where I live would get their undies in a bunch.
The Attack on the 2nd Amendment Continues
- Thread starter Hacker15e
- Start date
Minnesota is an open-carry state as well. While I do carry it is never 'open'. The soccer moms where I live would get their undies in a bunch.
Lawman
Well-Known Member
I like open carry if only for the protection it grants if you do accidentally expose your firearm through either printing or bending and your sweater tucks up etc.
Only time Actively do it is when is when I'm doing something on my own out in nowhere land like hunting.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Only time Actively do it is when is when I'm doing something on my own out in nowhere land like hunting.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nope. I am quite sure it would result in a conversation with the po-po. It may be more ignorance of the law but it wouldn't be well viewed.
Cazadores
Well-Known Member
Inconsiderate, crass, heartless is parading out these victims of violence as political fodder while stating nothing being done would change a thing.
As far as I'm concerned if the supporters of these measures really believe in them they should have passed them when they controlled both legislative houses and the White House seven years ago.
Either they know, as admitted by the president, they won't do anything, or they found it not politically expedient and lacked the backbone and will to fight for them.
Either way it is disingenuous. At its worst, if they really believe the gun control they seek would work, then the blood spilled by the victims whose families were present is on the President's hands, and other leaders who failed to act when they could out of fear for their precious political careers.
Talk about callous.
Last edited:
Cazadores
Well-Known Member
I think the difference now is our leadership and information outlets are so polarizing everything seems to require an immediate and overreacting backlash.
Democrats talk guns, well the Texans are going to expect their leadership to respond. That's why I think, most of this nonsense is going on.
The Fez
Analog Millennial
I do the same. Not much point in concealing a pistol if you're already carrying around a rifle. In AZ, you can draw the ire of the game wardens if you are carrying any type of weapon not specifically allowed for the particular hunt, especially the overzealous ones that don't keep current with rule changes.
I was stopped during an archery javelina hunt and was told it was illegal to be carrying a pistol. I asked to be shown exactly where that's said in the official hunting regulations I had with me and while he was looking I produced a 4" javelina tusk I had pulled from a badly mauled (likely by a bear) corpse just a few hundred yards off the road. Fact is, it's not illegal, and I explained how idiotic it would be to be trying to find aggressive animals out here by myself with a knife and a bow. I ain't no Rambo, and even my Glock 23 isn't going to do much to a 350+ lb black bear except hopefully scare it away. I'm shocked that there are still states that don't allow carrying firearms while archery hunting. If not for the 4-legged ones, for the really strange 2-legged ones I've come across in the wild.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
For you, and the rest of the folks on here that agree with you, here is an out take from the clip that I whole heartily agree with.
http://www.esquire.com/entertainment/tv/videos/a41024/trevor-noah-obama-tears-guns/
"Are you f***ing kidding me? Shedding tears when you think of murdered children is not really believable? You know what? There is something here that is not really believable, the fact that the rest of us have to share the title of human being with you."
A Life Aloft
Well-Known Member
And here I have been thinking how unbelievable it is that the rest of us have to share the world with complete and utter idiots. This just confirms that.
Man, I really would suggest against that.
Granted we have our "Poindexters" but we also have our "Goliaths". The internet is a dangerous place for assumptions!
Cptnchia
Dissatisfied Customer
Goliath was defeated by a poindexter called David.
Lawman
Well-Known Member
That article wins the internet.
That is the second greater onion article I've seen right after the Op-Ed piece from the CEO of Gillette that in real life actually ended up predicting the future.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cazadores
Well-Known Member
So where did I even refer to tears, or anything you used in response to my statement which starts with "for you" at which point you call me a non human.
I like sparring with you on line from time to time. I get bored sitting in airports and hotels. In order for it to be interesting it requires you to read and respond to the content presented, not just fling insults when you have no intelligent response.
You clearly cannot answer why this administration and those in agreement with it did nothing substantial on gun control while it could. We can argue over the ACA and its successes and failures, but the fact is if the gun control crowd really believed their rhetoric about "gun violence" health insurance is meaningless and job number one when they controlled Congress and the White House should have been gun control. They are either using it as a political tool to create a wedge issue and avoid having to come up with real solutions for real problems, or they really believe tens of thousands of lives could be saved annually and put their political careers first 7 years ago.
Obama and the rest of the gun control politicians kept quiet, even after Aurora, waiting to win a second term to start beating the gun control drum with the same tired non solutions. If they truly believe in these policies and kept quiet when they had control of the federal legislative and law enforcement apparatus then they are the ones who are guilty of being sub human.
As for the tears, perhaps the President believes in these policies, and his tears are those born of guilt, looking at the families of the victims knowing he and his political allies chose their political careers over the lives of these victims.
So, you can call me names, and post some unrelated Comedy Central editorial, or you can answer the question of which path my party chose, cynical wedge issue or political expedience over innocent lives.
But, you'll probably just call me names.
Acadia
Well-Known Member
That line earns a resounding WTF?
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
Another thing in Minnesota. That shotgun for home defense ended up being.................
http://www.startribune.com/investigation-continues-into-deaths-of-greenwood-family/326692481/
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
I know him. Had a lunch with him at the Airbus facility in MIA when he was at his previous carrier in training at the same time I was. He's a great guy. Everyone who knows him knows his background, the work he's done for ALPA, and his current airline. None of this should be in question just because you disagree with him on the gun control topic.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
Meh. This day and age, the skin color and/or middle eastern-sounding name of the person committing the act will get the same condition labeled as terrorism.
One isolated attack here on US soil (9/11), and despite the statistical irrelevance of you being killed in a terrorist attack, we spent billions on wars, security, DHS, and gave up freedoms via the Patriot Act all in the name of "keeping us safe."
The chance of me being killed by a gun by someone else are far higher than me being killed here in a terrorist attack. But we spent billions to fix one and even came up with unconstitutional things in the process that, apparently, people were okay with in the name of safety. But don't "touch ma guns" mantra squashes any chance of trying to try even 1/1000th of the same kinds of efforts on gun control as they did with "fighting terror."