Man shopping with Assault Rifle Strapped to his Back at Utah J.C. Penney

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by Cuervo

Just as a side note, and there's no "race card" attempt here, but what do you think would be the reaction if this guy was a minority instead of a white man?

Posters here would likely be more understanding and less critical since white guy with gun = angry racists and black guy with gun = oppressed minority guarding against klansmen.

in california, Ronald Reagen and republicans back in the 60's, made it against the law, when black people wanted to excercise their 2nd amendment rights for open-carry, but apparently white guys were allowed to carry them to Obama rallies without a law being passed against that....hmmm
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Cuervo

Prepared to get shot by a cop, maybe.

Then that cop would be going to jail.

Just as a side note, and there's no "race card" attempt here, but what do you think would be the reaction if this guy was a minority instead of a white man?

When someone prefaces a statement with “no race card attempt” that means that person is about to play the race card.

Anyway, who cares if it was a black man?? The only people that would be worried about that are racists…you know…people who play the race card and race bait in situation where their argument has fallen apart.

reply to post by kosmicjack

well now, doesn't this short statement sum up the entirety of complaints ??

I don't care if it is his "right",

... so very few words with such monumental impact

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by ausername

 

you might want to watch the actual video

the narrative of the camera wielder indicates this is not unusual behavior ... she just recorded it so others could see and realize that this is not abnormal activity in that region.

Or to make a lame political point, it is unusual, the local reports will indicate that.

Personally I see it as only one thing... Stupid!

reply to post by jimmyx


Yeah, he did. Reagan was a bigot trying to disarm the Panthers who did more for gun rights than any other group out there.

If you were paying attention there was plenty of venom spit at the armed white folks showing up in teabag rallies too.

Talking heads and celebs called for disarming them almost nightly on their "news" shows.

All prohibition is based in hate and ignorance.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere


All prohibition is based in hate and ignorance.

I think MANY fail to understand how true this really is.

Deny Ignorance indeed.

Doing dangerous, reckless and stupid things just because you can, or to make a point because you have that right in your sate is a great way to motivate the lawmakers to change the law.

Originally posted by lernmore
I'd be willing to bet my whole life savings that nobody got robbed, raped, kidnapped, or shot within 100 feet of him that day. Any Takers?

On almost every day of the week Your Statement would be True. The fact that he was carrying a gun on that day had little to do with it.

IF he was wanting to play "gaurd " for you he would have cruised a rough area where he would have had a chance to "intervene'.

Instead he is making a political point " I am allowed to carry these in case Uncle Sam oppresses me".


One gentle man commented "that we should all do it", "carry our legal guns in public". Kinda like the old west. There were more shootings and hanging but everyone felt justice was being done right? No one was down trodden as long as they owned a gun too!

So if a messy incident had happened in the mall when our JC Penny shopper was there.
-is he culable for deaths caused by others? he had a big legal gun right. He should have stopped it right?
-if he killed an innocent bystander is it murder 1, 2 or man slaughter? He was prepared he had ammo and a big legal guns.

Question for all of us? Some people sirrounding the issue feel that a greater gun presence would reduce incidents, right? At a shoot-out, a bank robbery, etc. should the police investigate who in the area had a legal weapons and give them poop for NOT carrying their gun and not intervening?

QueStion for all of us? We , as a country sat down and over 200 years trained a multifaceted professional army from all parts of the country and based in all parts of the country. Right? Can we not trust it? Do we the citizen have to be prepared to protect our selves on the street from all the legal gun use by citisen's , the military, the National Gaurd, the police ?

Do we need to carry machine guns to go threaten the government for a welfare cheque?
Do we need to carry machine guns to go threaten the government for my car registration?

reply to post by ausername

Doing dangerous, reckless and stupid things just because you can, or to make a point because you have that right in your sate is a great way to motivate the lawmakers to change the law.

So walking around legally with a firearm is “dangerous, reckless and stupid” in your opinion? So is this how you feel about the police, too? What about ATF and other government types? Is it only “dangerous, reckless and stupid” when your neighbor does it?

I must ask again, what are you so scared of?

reply to post by ausername

Or to make a lame political point

regardless, it is still his right to make a political statement just as much as it is his right to carry his Liberty tools in public.

it is unusual, the local reports will indicate that

proof please ?
otherwise this is pure conjecture.

Personally I see it as only one thing... Stupid!

you are welcome to such opinion and i am free to disagree

Originally posted by seabag

I must ask again, what are you so scared of?

Nothing.

2nd

Originally posted by ausername
Doing dangerous, reckless and stupid things just because you can, or to make a point because you have that right in your sate is a great way to motivate the lawmakers to change the law.

it sure worked for Homer Plessy, didn't it ??
/sarcasm

ETA -- for those who don't know, thanks to Homer's actions, we ended up with Federal sanctioned and forced segregation, remember ?

Originally posted by ausername
Doing dangerous, reckless and stupid things just because you can, or to make a point because you have that right in your sate is a great way to motivate the lawmakers to change the law.

First, None of the things this man did was dangerous reckless, or stupid.


They are going to circumvent our RIGHTS, regardless...........

Its called "executive" action, order, or what ever other name you want to place after it. Im sure glad we still have the 10th Amendment !

Originally posted by Chadwickus
So what happens when another law abiding citizen carrying a gun spots this guy in the car park pulling out his rifle and spare clips from the boot of his car and thinks he's just spotted a guy about to go on a shooting spree and shoots him?

Oh the irony, it burns.

Kind of like when I drive past baseball fields I think that all those baseball bats are going to be used to hit people over the head...

The Vast majority of baseball players don't think that way, and the vast majority of guns owner also don't think that way.

Originally posted by ausername
Doing dangerous, reckless and stupid things just because you can, or to make a point because you have that right in your sate is a great way to motivate the lawmakers to change the law.

Hmm, was he also running around pointing his gun at people too... I missed that part of the story, can you repost it, or something?

BTW a store has the right to ask the person with the gun to leave, right to carry doesn't mean you have total freedom to go into any business. If JC Pennys thought it was a big deal all they would need to do is ask him to leave and come back without the gun....I guess they didn't think it was a big deal....

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by jimmyx

ok..so where is the nation, or a large society in the world that walks around with displayed weapons carried by ordinary citizens?...i can think of somalia, and afghanistan off the top of my head, but, i guess you would be perfectly comfortable living there.

Ah, reducto ad Somalium

Guess that means you're done?

not at all, i support the 2nd amendment, i know there are alot of bad guys out there, that if they had a chance to rob me they would, and i do fear them beating me senseless, or even killing me for my possessions.
and i do know that in the 2nd amendement a milita is made up of ordinary citizens having arms in their homes, where they could be called upon to form a militia if needed. the national guard is NOT a militia, because it's weapons are locked up, and centrally located, and it is also controlled by the state.
there should be happy medium however, because we can not guess the intentions of everyone that carries a firearm....there might be a real nice guy who acts sane all the time, until one day he sees the person that F'ed his ex-wife, which lead to their divorce, and pop, pop, pop...where if he wasn't carrying, it might just be a fist fight...remember, even the most stable people have days when they are piss-raving angry.

reply to post by DeadSteve1234

We , as a country sat down and over 200 years trained a multifaceted professional army from all parts of the country and based in all parts of the country. Right?

NO, we didn't.
We, Constitutionally created the Navy.
the Masons developed the Marines and a 'standing' army was frowned upon since the Convention, argued fervently and subsequently phrased as something to be 'raised in a time of war'. so, when was the last declaration of War ???
and, why do we still have a 'standing army' ??

Safety is the responsibility of every Free person.
if you delegate your responsibility to someone else, that is your perrogative.
YOU have no authority to delegate or limit MY responsibility.

Hi,
I remember when I used to want to see two cars collide. I didn’t know why for a long time…I guess it was the shock and awe I felt when I saw my first collision that drove my desire to see more devastation -by way of cars crashing into each other. I’m nolonger awed or shocked when I see the effects of car crashes, I guess I’ve been desensitized (evolved); I get really sad nowadays when cars collide, because now I understand that people lose their lives in car crashes all too often.

I’d be shocked and awed for the first few open-carries (by civilians) I would see. It’s not something I am used to seeing. I don’t have the desire to watch people shoot each other because it’s like two cars crashing, but I wouldn’t mind being desensitized to lawful open-carry protocols. It might be just like putting the brakes on in a car-crash scenario?

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by Soloprotocol

I know enough about firearms to make a comparison...anyone with a little knowledge of mechanical engineering and the right tooling could convert any Semi Automatic to Full Retard.....sounds to me like some of you were converted some while back...

Someone with a little mechanical knowledge and the right tooling can convert a trashbag full of aluminum cans into an M60. Are we going to track drill presses? Register every one who can weld?

Aluminum makes losy gun barrels, alot of the gun is die casted then cnc machined etc,. I do not remember any welds. So we can eliminate those items of concern for you. Criminals buy legal semi's and convert them. Even if you commit not other crime converting a semi to automatic IS NOT YOUR GOD GIVEN RIGHT.

The government does on the other hand keep track of all the gun smiths so they can do cross check WHEN THEY find a legal weapon modified to automatic. They keep a list of criminals they have caught doing this. Seems reasonable to they at least try to moniter this temptation.

reply to post by DeadSteve1234

keep track of all the gun smiths

perhaps those who are licensed to do business.
good luck keeping track of all the "hobbyists"