• NRA: "Open carry demonstrations crossed the line from enthusiasm to downright foolishness."
    100 replies, posted
[QUOTE=sgman91;45001799]It isn't the job or responsibility of regular citizens to make the populace comfortable with legal actions. The blame completely falls on the irrational fear of the people in question and the fear mongering done by anti-gun groups. You're essentially blaming the victim.[/QUOTE] Have you ever made a single good post in your near-8 year Facepunch career
[QUOTE=Lv100Garchomp;44994680]Eh, you just need a class 3 license to be able to own an assault rifle, which means you can't be a felon (duh), pay a tax on the rifle, and come in every so often to keep your license. It's not nearly impossible, it's just harder. Something nearly impossible is being able to make explosives and use them legally.[/QUOTE] That's for dealers, and there's quite a few strings attached to that. For people who want to own an assault rifle (or any other "machine gun" as they're known legally) without going into the firearms business it's a bit tricky. You have to go through the NFA registration process, paperwork, background checks, passport checks, a lengthy and detailed application, approval from local law enforcement, and a $200 tax stamp, and the gun itself has to have been made prior to 1986. Most of the difficulty comes from that cutoff date because that means there's a finite supply of legal machine guns and as time goes on that supply is only going to decrease in availability and increase in price.
[QUOTE=catbarf;45001885]To be fair he has something of a point. If you're doing something totally within the law and otherwise reasonable, it's not your responsibility to stop other people from being irrationally afraid. But open-carrying assault rifles doesn't fall within that category, and there's a difference between legal and socially acceptable. If open carry is legal, then you shouldn't be arrested because someone saw you open carrying and got scared. But at the same time, that doesn't mean you aren't being an asshole and don't deserve a talking-to.[/QUOTE] if you're open carrying to deliberately be antagonistic and someone calls you out for it you're not a victim.
Open carrying a rifle in the city is retarded, your just pointing out that you have a $$$ target on your back. It is not the social norm to to walking around with a rifle in urban/city envoirments. Keep that shit in the woods/forest. Chances are someone can just billy club you in the back of the head and steal your 1,000$ rifle before you can even shoulder it.
[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;45001896]Have you ever made a single good post in your near-8 year Facepunch career[/QUOTE] I literally couldn't care less what you thought. If people are acting legally, then it isn't their responsibility to increase public opinion about their actions. If they want to fight that fight, then more power to them, but it shouldn't be expected. If someone wants to make it illegal, then more power to them as well. The problem is when people claim some arbitrary moral high ground as if they've reached the objective truth on the subject and then look down upon everyone who disagrees when the actual evidence is far from conclusive. In my opinion more freedom is always better unless strong evidence exists to show that a specific freedom does a lot of measurable damage to others.
[QUOTE=sgman91;45003465]I literally couldn't care less what you thought. If people are acting legally, then it isn't their responsibility to increase public opinion about their actions. If they want to fight that fight, then more power to them, but it shouldn't be expected. If someone wants to make it illegal, then more power to them as well. The problem is when people claim some arbitrary moral high ground as if they've reached the objective truth on the subject and then look down upon everyone who disagrees when the actual evidence is far from conclusive. In my opinion more freedom is always better unless strong evidence exists to show that a specific freedom does a lot of measurable damage to others.[/QUOTE] i should be able to wear a bomb vest in public to express my freedom more freedom is always better right
[QUOTE=DeEz;45006174]i should be able to wear a bomb vest in public to express my freedom more freedom is always better right[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.tanksforsale.co.uk/[/url]
[QUOTE=Maxjes;44994646]Oh man people are scared of things that can kill them. How unreasonable of them.[/QUOTE] As someone from the UK I find it weird that you would be instantly subdued by police if you walked around town with a machete or even a switchblade but a rifle is A-OK according to some people
[QUOTE=Nak;45006235][url]http://www.tanksforsale.co.uk/[/url][/QUOTE] Except that there are a fair number of restrictions on buying armoured vehicles. One of the more common ones (which vary from country to country) is the gun and firing systems are deactivated, and depending on the country, the barrel may have to be partly filled in (commonly concrete).
[QUOTE=ZakkShock;44993907]We had a soccermom call my managers the other day when I was at work because a guy was open carrying this glorious M1911 on his hip. Didn't threaten anyone didn't make any trouble. Paid for what he needed, told us to have a blessed day and that was that. but m-m-muh chillins[/QUOTE] Why is this getting dumbed? It's not like the dude was carrying an AR-15 around. It's a handgun. Hell, even my dad carries a 9mm with his CC license. It's usually strapped to his belt or inside of a fanny pack. I mean there's not really much place else to put a handgun at.
[QUOTE=sgman91;45001799]It isn't the job or responsibility of regular citizens to make the populace comfortable with legal actions. The blame completely falls on the irrational fear of the people in question and the fear mongering done by anti-gun groups. You're essentially blaming the victim.[/QUOTE] Wrong. If a person insists on promoting a concept, change in law, or social injustice, then they need to be able and willing to educate those who are less-informed. There are much better ways to educate people on gun safety and gun laws than to strap a large weapon to your body and parade it around. All you're going to do is terrify people and push them AWAY from your cause. It's not much different from SJWs who scream at people for doing something wrong and then refusing to educate them on WHY it was wrong. You're not helping your cause at all.
[QUOTE=DeEz;45006174]i should be able to wear a bomb vest in public to express my freedom more freedom is always better right[/QUOTE] "In my opinion more freedom is always better unless strong evidence exists to show that a specific freedom does a lot of measurable damage to others." There's a pretty darn strong correlation, and logical causation, between wearing a bomb vest and doing harm to others. This doesn't exist for legally wearing a gun. [editline]5th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Dalndox;45007139]Wrong. If a person insists on promoting a concept, change in law, or social injustice, then they need to be able and willing to educate those who are less-informed. There are much better ways to educate people on gun safety and gun laws than to strap a large weapon to your body and parade it around. All you're going to do is terrify people and push them AWAY from your cause. It's not much different from SJWs who scream at people for doing something wrong and then refusing to educate them on WHY it was wrong. You're not helping your cause at all.[/QUOTE] A couple points: - They aren't insisting anything... the LAW insists it. It's already legal. They have nothing to promote. - When did they ever claim to be doing it for the purpose of educating people on gun safety? - SJWs are attempting to change behavior and/or law. The gun carriers in question are not attempting to change anything. They just want to be left alone. These two groups are essentially opposite in their goals.
[QUOTE=sgman91;45007781]"In my opinion more freedom is always better unless strong evidence exists to show that a specific freedom does a lot of measurable damage to others." There's a pretty darn strong correlation, and logical causation, between wearing a bomb vest and doing harm to others. This doesn't exist for legally wearing a gun.[/QUOTE] there is a pretty darn strong correlation and logical causation between America's civilian arms industry doing harm to others. Which legally wearing a gun is only an extension of.
[QUOTE=Gentry;45007816]there is a pretty darn strong correlation and logical causation between America's civilian arms industry doing hard to others. Which legally wearing a gun is only an extension of.[/QUOTE] You can't have a correlation between a general group and an action. That doesn't even make sense. Also, there isn't even a connection between the two. People can easily import foreign guns to wear.
[QUOTE=sgman91;45007828]You can't have a correlation between a general group and an action. That doesn't even make sense.[/QUOTE] [quote=The Economist]If America is ever to confront its obsession with guns, that time is now. America’s murder rate is four times higher than Britain’s and six times higher than Germany’s. Only an idiot, or an anti-American bigot prepared to maintain that Americans are four times more murderous than Britons, could possibly pretend that no connection exists between those figures and the fact that 300m guns are “out there” in the United States, more than one for every adult.[/quote] [url]http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21568735-only-drastic-gun-control-could-make-big-difference-small-measures-can-help-bit-newtowns[/url] if you really want to talk about 'social harm and freedoms'. [editline]5th June 2014[/editline] My ultimate point being, that these people want to extend or make more prominent a culture which is incredibly harmful for the country and kills a lot of people needlessly. So there is a measurable amount of damage these people are trying to promote. [editline]5th June 2014[/editline] lets wait for the denialism from the facepunch gun owners club
[QUOTE=counterpo0;45002052]Open carrying a rifle in the city is retarded, your just pointing out that you have a $$$ target on your back. It is not the social norm to to walking around with a rifle in urban/city envoirments. Keep that shit in the woods/forest. Chances are someone can just billy club you in the back of the head and steal your 1,000$ rifle before you can even shoulder it.[/QUOTE] This, to me the only thing that would make sense would be concealed carry. I mean the whole point of open carry is to show off to everyone that you are armed, if you just want to defend yourself then you should be concealing it without freaking out a bunch of soccer moms.
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;44994185]A gun is like a penis: no one wants to see you walking around with it out in public.[/QUOTE] And they like it even less when you discharge it.
[QUOTE=Mingebox;45008064]And they like it even less when you discharge it.[/QUOTE] Don't worry, I only shoot blanks.
It's so weird to read these stories from a Western European perspective. Not once in my entire life did I encounter a situation where I thought it would be improved if I had a deadly weapon on me. Seeing people walking around with giant rifles on their back (or pistols on their belt) would be extremely distressing. The only people I want to see carrying guns are police and even that makes me slightly uncomfortable.
I get that its legal to do it in some places, but i just don't understand why anyone would WANT to be seen strolling around with a deadly weapon in plain view. I understand the firearms for sport stuff, and the self defence stuff to an extent (but then, i can only think of two occasions in my entire life where i would have felt the magnitude of danger to my life made use of a gun necessary, and even then my assailants would likely have had guns if i had lived in a place where they were available). but i can't for the life of me figure out what purpose broadcasting the fact you are carrying a device that could *end somebody's life*, with the squeeze of a trigger, to everyone around you, could possibly serve.
[QUOTE=fulgrim;45008729]I get that its legal to do it in some places, but i just don't understand why anyone would WANT to be seen strolling around with a deadly weapon in plain view. I understand the firearms for sport stuff, and the self defence stuff to an extent (but then, i can only think of two occasions in my entire life where i would have felt the magnitude of danger to my life made use of a gun necessary, and even then my assailants would likely have had guns if i had lived in a place where they were available). but i can't for the life of me figure out what purpose broadcasting the fact you are carrying a device that could *end somebody's life*, with the squeeze of a trigger, to everyone around you, could possibly serve.[/QUOTE] I think the original intent was to demonstrate that gun owner does not automatically equal crazy redneck who fantasizes about killing burglars and overthrowing the Obama administration. Unfortunately the aforementioned people then showed up and started promoting their own ideals and here we are. The message they're sending has turned from "this is legal, let's show people why" to "let's make people think this shouldn't be legal." To answer your first point, it's almost entirely there for hunters. If you're out with your hunting buddy walking down the road in your orange camo with your rifles over your shoulders, you don't have to worry about committing a crime just by being there. A cop [i]could[/i] stop and ask what you were doing, but it'd be pretty obvious what's going on and, at least in more rural areas, they never bother.
[QUOTE=Gentry;45007852][URL]http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21568735-only-drastic-gun-control-could-make-big-difference-small-measures-can-help-bit-newtowns[/URL] if you really want to talk about 'social harm and freedoms'. [editline]5th June 2014[/editline] My ultimate point being, that these people want to extend or make more prominent a culture which is incredibly harmful for the country and kills a lot of people needlessly. So there is a measurable amount of damage these people are trying to promote. [editline]5th June 2014[/editline] lets wait for the denialism from the facepunch gun owners club[/QUOTE] Because gun ownership is the only thing that is different between the USA and socialized countries like the UK and Germany. Absolutely stellar skills of observation. Did you ever consider differences in poverty and social assistance, average education, or affordable health care? Can't be any of those, has to be the guns, right? Let's consider another problem with root causes similar to crime: teen pregnancy. UK? About 46 out of every 1000 girls under 18. USA? About 75 out of every 1000 girls. Germany? Only about 8 out of every 1000. How about suicide rates? USA: 12 per 100k UK: 11.8 per 100k Germany: 9.9 per 100k This is starting to seem like a cultural thing and not a "MUH GUNS" thing. You know what? Just for fun, let's check out Canada. Not only is it where I'm from, it's directly north of the USA and one of its staunchest allies in war and trade. We even get a lot of American television channels up here. So naturally some of that MURRICA is going to rub off on us, right? [B]Canada[/B] Murder rate: USA is 3 times higher than Canada (1.6 vs. 4.8 out of 100k) Teen Pregnancy: 33.9 (as opposed to 75) Suicide: 11.5 (vs. 12) Doesn't look like you yanks have had much of an effect on us afterall. [quote]Only an idiot, or an anti-American bigot prepared to maintain that Americans are four times more murderous than Britons[/quote] Only an idiot would use that article to support their opinion. It's a garbage emotional analysis of what they think is a problem, but is actually a symptom of other problems. I can't believe they got it so wrong. [QUOTE=DeEz;45006174]i should be able to wear a bomb vest in public to express my freedom more freedom is always better right[/QUOTE] Wow.
To be honest I feel sorry for you if you live in a country where you fear for your life everyday so you have to carry a weapon around to defend yourself And if you don't why the fuck are you walking around with a gun like it's a fashion accessory
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;45010771]Because gun ownership is the only thing that is different between the USA and socialized countries like the UK and Germany. Absolutely stellar skills of observation. Did you ever consider differences in poverty and social assistance, average education, or affordable health care? Can't be any of those, has to be the guns, right? Let's consider another problem with root causes similar to crime: teen pregnancy. UK? About 46 out of every 1000 girls under 18. USA? About 75 out of every 1000 girls. Germany? Only about 8 out of every 1000. How about suicide rates? USA: 12 per 100k UK: 11.8 per 100k Germany: 9.9 per 100k This is starting to seem like a cultural thing and not a "MUH GUNS" thing. You know what? Just for fun, let's check out Canada. Not only is it where I'm from, it's directly north of the USA and one of its staunchest allies in war and trade. We even get a lot of American television channels up here. So naturally some of that MURRICA is going to rub off on us, right? [B]Canada[/B] Murder rate: USA is 3 times higher than Canada (1.6 vs. 4.8 out of 100k) Teen Pregnancy: 33.9 (as opposed to 75) Suicide: 11.5 (vs. 12) Doesn't look like you yanks have had much of an effect on us afterall. Only an idiot would use that article to support their opinion. It's a garbage emotional analysis of what they think is a problem, but is actually a symptom of other problems. I can't believe they got it so wrong. Wow.[/QUOTE] where are your academic studies linking teen pregnancy to America's super inflated homicide rate? because there are several which link it to firearms.
I never saw the point in open carry. If you must have a gun because "muh rights" then carry it in a descret manner. Why show it off like the size of your penis.
[QUOTE=Gentry;45011552]where are your academic studies linking teen pregnancy to America's super inflated homicide rate? because there are several which link it to firearms.[/QUOTE] From my post: [quote]Let's consider another problem with root causes similar to crime[/quote] Teen pregnancy is not linked to murder, it's linked to poverty, lack of education, and lack of affordable health care. Murder rates are linked to the first two. Try reading before dropping your next box.
Considering Australia doesn't have a big gun culture, I'd be very nervous seeing people walk around with guns out. I suppose it depends on the environment of how likely it will make people nervous. I find it unnecessary , again that depends on where you live and such.
[QUOTE=AWarGuy;45013107]Considering Australia doesn't have a big gun culture, I'd be very nervous seeing people walk around with guns out. I suppose it depends on the environment of how likely it will make people nervous. I find it unnecessary , again that depends on where you live and such.[/QUOTE] Even in the United States were guns are such a mainstay, especially in rural areas, people tend to get uncomfortable by open carry folks. That's why restaurants have been requesting people not to bring their guns in and why open carry organizations have mostly complied with requests. People on FP can talk about responsible gun owners and the fact that guns are tools who can't fire themselves and that car accidents heart disease kill way more people every year than guns but nothing is going to counter the fact that a family of four doesn't want to go out to Applebees and all the sudden see 6 huge dudes with AR15's strapped over their shoulder walk in. If you think that is a perfectly reasonable and comfortable scenario I'm afraid to inform you that you are stuck in a bubble that exists outside of normalcy.
If you think that that's a common enough scenario to mean anything in a real policy discussion than you are the one outside of normalcy.
Both open carry and concealed carry are stupid. Never carry a gun unless you're at a shooting range or hunting
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.