freedom_fighter777
New member
.
Federal lawsuit against cleveland heights police filed!
- Thread starter freedom_fighter777
- Start date
ClearSightTactical
New member
Awesome brother, IMO you're rights were violated, and I do believe you are owed a formal apology, and this department needs to educate their officers on the correct protocol for responding to panic calls about law abiding citizens utilizing their rights.
I do however, hope that this action is not based solely on potential financial gain. Thank you for standing up, and doing what most will not. I wish you luck, and hope that you keep this board updated.
PS; I'm sure you're attorney has told you this, but keep your mouth shut. Don't state any motives for the suit, and don't make any posts/comments that are not public record.
I do however, hope that this action is not based solely on potential financial gain. Thank you for standing up, and doing what most will not. I wish you luck, and hope that you keep this board updated.
PS; I'm sure you're attorney has told you this, but keep your mouth shut. Don't state any motives for the suit, and don't make any posts/comments that are not public record.
PascalFleischman
New member
I can't wait for this case to develop and see what this guy was doing prior to turning on the camera.
In any group of government officials, be they police or politicians, inevitably the one doing the most lip flapping is the one with the least knowledge about that which they are flapping their lips. Officer Jane Doe proved that.
What happened after the tape ended? Did they arrest you, keep your firearm and let you go? Give you back your firearm and apologize?
What happened after the tape ended? Did they arrest you, keep your firearm and let you go? Give you back your firearm and apologize?
Unfettered Might
Μολών λαβ&
Good job. Your founding fathers would be proud.
This Pressed my HOT Button
I have to strongly disagree with this, but please read my entire response before your crucify me.
All something like this does is bring unnecessary attention at a time when the current climate politically is creating enough problems. I understand the law, but I also understand common sense. If I was a cop, what am I expected to do? Just let anyone walk down the street with a gun? I am extremely pro concealed carry and I am active in state politics regarding changing the laws to make this easier once a person has qualified, but I am dead set against open carry, at least in residential or heavily populated areas. All it does is give the antis something to work with and scares the H#*$ out of the ordinary civilian. If I was a parent and saw someone walking through my neighborhood, I would want to know who the H#*& it was too!
I know all the arguments against my viewpoint and I even agree with many of them. However, REALISTICALY, all I see from this is a step backward for those of us trying to make things better and easier as far as getting gun legislation passed. This is counter productive and inflammatory IMHO, whether it is lawful of not, it is not SMART. Come at me with an "In Your Face" attitude for pro gun rights and you will get an "In Your Face, Right Back At Ya” response from the antis AND the average citizen. Also, it will erode our support from the many law officers that are currently on our side. This we can not afford.
As gun owners and supporters of the 2nd Amendment, it is our responsibly to act responsibly and EDUCATE people by setting an example, not by inflaming the situation. Show someone a gun and how to shoot; get them hooked. Get them educated with REAL facts, figures and experiences. If a person’s first introduction to firearms is basically being hit over the head with one while you say "It's my right", I can assure you that I would work quickly and very diligently to make sure you no longer have that right! More importantly, the MEDIA would support me; would you be able to say the same? Would you get the coverage I would get? Just wait until I bring out my crying children that were” scared” of the “bad man with a gun!” YOUR rights do not trump MY rights. Fitting into the stereotype the media has created (wrongly), is not the example we as responsible gun owners should be displaying. We should be working to dispel that stereotype, not reinforcing it.
To me this situation was unnecessary, counter productive and does NOTHING to increase our ability to lawfully possess a weapon. It does however, make it MUCH harder, if not impossible now to win over the people that called the police and many of those observing. "Look, the police have that gun totter down on the ground and handcuffed, I knew he was a bad guy" is what people observed and that just reinforces their negative view; it has done NOTHING to create a POSITIVE one.
We all need to be SMARTER than our adversaries and play to OUR strengths, not THEIRS. Confrontation is not the way to achieve anything. Confrontation is EXACTLY what our opposition wants and I for one do not intend to provide them with ANTHING that could potentially hurt the cause whether I am RIGHT or not. In this scenario we potentially lost multiple families that could have been allies, given the media something to scream and stomp their feet over, threatened any rights that currently exist and alienated several police officers. Was this guy right? YES! Was he SMART? NO! Did he achieve anything POSITIVE? NO. Did he achieve anything NEGATIVE? ABSOLUTLEY!
I have to strongly disagree with this, but please read my entire response before your crucify me.
All something like this does is bring unnecessary attention at a time when the current climate politically is creating enough problems. I understand the law, but I also understand common sense. If I was a cop, what am I expected to do? Just let anyone walk down the street with a gun? I am extremely pro concealed carry and I am active in state politics regarding changing the laws to make this easier once a person has qualified, but I am dead set against open carry, at least in residential or heavily populated areas. All it does is give the antis something to work with and scares the H#*$ out of the ordinary civilian. If I was a parent and saw someone walking through my neighborhood, I would want to know who the H#*& it was too!
I know all the arguments against my viewpoint and I even agree with many of them. However, REALISTICALY, all I see from this is a step backward for those of us trying to make things better and easier as far as getting gun legislation passed. This is counter productive and inflammatory IMHO, whether it is lawful of not, it is not SMART. Come at me with an "In Your Face" attitude for pro gun rights and you will get an "In Your Face, Right Back At Ya” response from the antis AND the average citizen. Also, it will erode our support from the many law officers that are currently on our side. This we can not afford.
As gun owners and supporters of the 2nd Amendment, it is our responsibly to act responsibly and EDUCATE people by setting an example, not by inflaming the situation. Show someone a gun and how to shoot; get them hooked. Get them educated with REAL facts, figures and experiences. If a person’s first introduction to firearms is basically being hit over the head with one while you say "It's my right", I can assure you that I would work quickly and very diligently to make sure you no longer have that right! More importantly, the MEDIA would support me; would you be able to say the same? Would you get the coverage I would get? Just wait until I bring out my crying children that were” scared” of the “bad man with a gun!” YOUR rights do not trump MY rights. Fitting into the stereotype the media has created (wrongly), is not the example we as responsible gun owners should be displaying. We should be working to dispel that stereotype, not reinforcing it.
To me this situation was unnecessary, counter productive and does NOTHING to increase our ability to lawfully possess a weapon. It does however, make it MUCH harder, if not impossible now to win over the people that called the police and many of those observing. "Look, the police have that gun totter down on the ground and handcuffed, I knew he was a bad guy" is what people observed and that just reinforces their negative view; it has done NOTHING to create a POSITIVE one.
We all need to be SMARTER than our adversaries and play to OUR strengths, not THEIRS. Confrontation is not the way to achieve anything. Confrontation is EXACTLY what our opposition wants and I for one do not intend to provide them with ANTHING that could potentially hurt the cause whether I am RIGHT or not. In this scenario we potentially lost multiple families that could have been allies, given the media something to scream and stomp their feet over, threatened any rights that currently exist and alienated several police officers. Was this guy right? YES! Was he SMART? NO! Did he achieve anything POSITIVE? NO. Did he achieve anything NEGATIVE? ABSOLUTLEY!
Which guy???
Unfettered Might
Μολών λαβ&
Ok, I read it all, now let the crucification begin...
Unnecessary attention? I prefer to stand up for our rights in public, in the process educating my fellow citizens. I'm actually going to get some shirts that read, "It's ok, you can ask me about your right to carry." Wear them so those that are nervous about asking will feel more at ease about learning and ADD to our numbers, not keep it a secret and leave people fearful of a god given right. The more people you educate, the less likely 2A will ever be amended. I personally have educated police officers to the details of our rights here in Kentucky. I actually had a sheriffs deputy detain me for OC once and he illegally took my weapon from me and illegally ran the numbers on my firearm, despite already knowing I wasn't a criminal. After calling into his supervisor and finding out I knew what I was talking about, he had to bring my firearm back and without going into detail, I made sure he won't be treating the next guy like that. Even though he didn't know the law, he STILL didn't find it necessary to point a gun at me. I would have had him crucified if he had.
Unless you, as a cop, are told that I was waving the gun around or peering into windows, you are not morally, or as in my state even legally, justified in questioning me or detaining me. Those cops were on a power trip and you need to learn that the particular "common sense" that you speak of is anything but, it's an opinion, use the proper vernacular. Quite manipulative on your part to imply that someone is stupid if they don't agree with your OPINION.
So it's ok to do it the way you see fit and not the way the men responsible for you even HAVING A CHOICE saw fit. You have somewhat of a tyrannical viewpoint sir. It gives the anti's nothing and I believe a quote is in order, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~ Benjamin Franklin. I am a parent and I don't feel the need to question a man walking down the street minding his own business, even if he has a gun. Criminals HIDE their guns, I would be more concerned about someone I saw CC than someone that wasn't afraid to let the world know they have a gun.
You cannot agree with a viewpoint and then argue against it, that's hypocritical. CC isn't a step forward, it's a step sideways. The step forward is to EDUCATE the average citizen. The anti's will always have a response, the average citizen hasn't decided or they wouldn't be in the third group so to say they will go against it because of an open display is naive and unfounded. As to most LEOs, their opinion is already made, they either like it or they don't. I bet many LEOs would disprove of their fellow officers' treatment of the victim and he was a victim.
We are both setting an example, but mine will implore others to ask questions, it has happened many times and there are people that carry now because of me. I'm not hitting anyone over the head with OC and for you to make remarks such as those in the last paragraph shows you have serious control issues. What rights of yours are being violated by me OCing? Please feel free to list them so I can take that apart too. I am a responsible gun owner and I OC, I am setting an example by that alone, that someone can see a MWAG who is going about their everyday normal activities and ISN"T shooting the store up or robbing anyone is the exact example we want to set. Care to explain how you are setting an example to the public by concealing your firearm so no one knows you have it in the first place?
It has EVERYTHING to do with our ability to lawfully possess a weapon, he will win in court, the police will be chastised for treating a law abiding citizen who was legally exercising a right. Those same people who called the police and most likely observed the whole situation will discover that he WASN"T a bad guy. They let him and his weapon go remember? Someone, who probably thought they were doing the right thing, discovered that day that they subjected an innocent man to treatment he didn't deserve and they may be reluctant to do it again. That statement was completely without merit.
As I have already shown, most of the above paragraph is without merit and solely your opinion regardless of the actual facts. I don't want to be a part of your version of the cause sir. I don't damn you for CC and I would fight as hard for your carry method as I would my own, for you to damn mine divides us and makes us weaker so you serve no true purpose to our cause other than to destroy from within. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it"~ Voltaire. The same idealism applies here.
Unnecessary attention? I prefer to stand up for our rights in public, in the process educating my fellow citizens. I'm actually going to get some shirts that read, "It's ok, you can ask me about your right to carry." Wear them so those that are nervous about asking will feel more at ease about learning and ADD to our numbers, not keep it a secret and leave people fearful of a god given right. The more people you educate, the less likely 2A will ever be amended. I personally have educated police officers to the details of our rights here in Kentucky. I actually had a sheriffs deputy detain me for OC once and he illegally took my weapon from me and illegally ran the numbers on my firearm, despite already knowing I wasn't a criminal. After calling into his supervisor and finding out I knew what I was talking about, he had to bring my firearm back and without going into detail, I made sure he won't be treating the next guy like that. Even though he didn't know the law, he STILL didn't find it necessary to point a gun at me. I would have had him crucified if he had.
Unless you, as a cop, are told that I was waving the gun around or peering into windows, you are not morally, or as in my state even legally, justified in questioning me or detaining me. Those cops were on a power trip and you need to learn that the particular "common sense" that you speak of is anything but, it's an opinion, use the proper vernacular. Quite manipulative on your part to imply that someone is stupid if they don't agree with your OPINION.
So it's ok to do it the way you see fit and not the way the men responsible for you even HAVING A CHOICE saw fit. You have somewhat of a tyrannical viewpoint sir. It gives the anti's nothing and I believe a quote is in order, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~ Benjamin Franklin. I am a parent and I don't feel the need to question a man walking down the street minding his own business, even if he has a gun. Criminals HIDE their guns, I would be more concerned about someone I saw CC than someone that wasn't afraid to let the world know they have a gun.
You cannot agree with a viewpoint and then argue against it, that's hypocritical. CC isn't a step forward, it's a step sideways. The step forward is to EDUCATE the average citizen. The anti's will always have a response, the average citizen hasn't decided or they wouldn't be in the third group so to say they will go against it because of an open display is naive and unfounded. As to most LEOs, their opinion is already made, they either like it or they don't. I bet many LEOs would disprove of their fellow officers' treatment of the victim and he was a victim.
We are both setting an example, but mine will implore others to ask questions, it has happened many times and there are people that carry now because of me. I'm not hitting anyone over the head with OC and for you to make remarks such as those in the last paragraph shows you have serious control issues. What rights of yours are being violated by me OCing? Please feel free to list them so I can take that apart too. I am a responsible gun owner and I OC, I am setting an example by that alone, that someone can see a MWAG who is going about their everyday normal activities and ISN"T shooting the store up or robbing anyone is the exact example we want to set. Care to explain how you are setting an example to the public by concealing your firearm so no one knows you have it in the first place?
It has EVERYTHING to do with our ability to lawfully possess a weapon, he will win in court, the police will be chastised for treating a law abiding citizen who was legally exercising a right. Those same people who called the police and most likely observed the whole situation will discover that he WASN"T a bad guy. They let him and his weapon go remember? Someone, who probably thought they were doing the right thing, discovered that day that they subjected an innocent man to treatment he didn't deserve and they may be reluctant to do it again. That statement was completely without merit.
As I have already shown, most of the above paragraph is without merit and solely your opinion regardless of the actual facts. I don't want to be a part of your version of the cause sir. I don't damn you for CC and I would fight as hard for your carry method as I would my own, for you to damn mine divides us and makes us weaker so you serve no true purpose to our cause other than to destroy from within. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it"~ Voltaire. The same idealism applies here.
Whew
Ok, I understand your passion for this topic, but let me say that I WOULD uphold your right to open carry and I WOULD help fight for that right. All I am saying is that there is more than one way to skin a cat so to speak.
Notice I never defended those particular cops. We both do have the same goal, just differing process for attaining them. If you DON"T take the public's opinion and reactions into account you WILL NOT be successful. If you don't have the support of MOST educated law enforcement officers you WILL NOT be successful, no matter how well you believe the Constitution supports your view point. Laws can be changed just as quickly against your cause as they can be changed to support it. Perception of the majority of citizens is what will decide.
A fox, when hunting, does not stand in an open field and say "I am higher on the food chain than you rabbits and squirrels. It is nature’s way that I am to eat you and survive and in the process help keep you from reproducing too quickly and destroying the natural balance. It is my RIGHT to eat you and to exist, so surrender and come to me." It walks quietly through the woods picking and choosing its battles. If a bear is killing its pup, the fox will fight because it is instinct, and it is not right for a bear to be allowed to kill it. The fox will fight, but the fox WILL loose. It is the same with sheeples. They are afraid of the wolf, but they are just as afraid of sheep dog. If all the sheeples got together as a group, they could easily defeat the wolf without the sheep dog, but they will NEVER do that. If the sheep dog and the wolf get in a fight, even it the fight is over protection of the sheeple, the sheeple will run off a cliff and kill them selves rather than help the sheep dog because they are equally afraid of both.
"Quote - he will win in court, the police will be chastised for treating a law abiding citizen who was legally exercising a right. Those same people who called the police and most likely observed the whole situation will discover that he WASN"T a bad guy."
Yes, you are correct. He will win in court, but I beg to differ on the public's perception. Not all of those who witnessed the event will see (or care about) the results. Several may end up knowing it was ok, more will never get that part of the story, and anyone who did not witness the whole event will only read the first few lines and think how stupid for someone to be walking down the street with a gun. On this forum, we all share the same basic views that it is the Constitution that matters. Guns do not scare us. Many others don't even know what the Constitution is; let alone why the 2nd Amendment was included. Heck, most people can't even grasp the concept that "Militia" means them!
In the end, who was "Right" and who was "Wrong" is of little consequence as to who actually WINS. The ones who think and act in a way that garners the most positive perception, gains the votes and wins.
"Quote - As I have already shown, most of the above paragraph is without merit and solely your opinion regardless of the actual facts. I don't want to be a part of your version of the cause sir. I don't damn you for CC and I would fight as hard for your carry method as I would my own, for you to damn mine divides us and makes us weaker so you serve no true purpose to our cause other than to destroy from within. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it"~ Voltaire. The same idealism applies here."
As I stated, I too will fight for your right to OC and I certainly don't damn you for it! Not sure where you got the impression I would not support your right. What I said was a reference to human nature. If you get in my face (the public's) with a belligerent Pro-gun attitude (perception), I, (the public) Will get right back in yours with an Anti-gun attitude. If this is what you are referring to, I did not mean ME. I was illustrating human nature.
Listen, I respect the fact that you and I differ on this. I appreciate your viewpoint and your passion. We (ALL 2nd Amendment, gun loving, country loving, freedom loving folks including BOTH you and I) all need to have that burning passion. I am glad to have you as a brother-in-arms and I am sure you would watch my 6 just as I would watch yours. You want to run a blitz and I want a quarterback sneak. Both plays can be useful and equally effective. The important thing is that we all remain on the same team.
If I gave you the impression that I would not support your cause, then that is in error. My writing skills leave something to be desired. I did not intend to impugn your viewpoint. We are brother; we may fight like cats and dogs with each other, but if someone else (anti’s) tries to land a blow I will defend you to the death.
Peace my friend. Fight the good fight as I will continue to do. Perhaps we shall meet our combined enemy in one final battle and we shall fight side by side like Spartans!
leasantry:
Ok, I understand your passion for this topic, but let me say that I WOULD uphold your right to open carry and I WOULD help fight for that right. All I am saying is that there is more than one way to skin a cat so to speak.
Notice I never defended those particular cops. We both do have the same goal, just differing process for attaining them. If you DON"T take the public's opinion and reactions into account you WILL NOT be successful. If you don't have the support of MOST educated law enforcement officers you WILL NOT be successful, no matter how well you believe the Constitution supports your view point. Laws can be changed just as quickly against your cause as they can be changed to support it. Perception of the majority of citizens is what will decide.
A fox, when hunting, does not stand in an open field and say "I am higher on the food chain than you rabbits and squirrels. It is nature’s way that I am to eat you and survive and in the process help keep you from reproducing too quickly and destroying the natural balance. It is my RIGHT to eat you and to exist, so surrender and come to me." It walks quietly through the woods picking and choosing its battles. If a bear is killing its pup, the fox will fight because it is instinct, and it is not right for a bear to be allowed to kill it. The fox will fight, but the fox WILL loose. It is the same with sheeples. They are afraid of the wolf, but they are just as afraid of sheep dog. If all the sheeples got together as a group, they could easily defeat the wolf without the sheep dog, but they will NEVER do that. If the sheep dog and the wolf get in a fight, even it the fight is over protection of the sheeple, the sheeple will run off a cliff and kill them selves rather than help the sheep dog because they are equally afraid of both.
"Quote - he will win in court, the police will be chastised for treating a law abiding citizen who was legally exercising a right. Those same people who called the police and most likely observed the whole situation will discover that he WASN"T a bad guy."
Yes, you are correct. He will win in court, but I beg to differ on the public's perception. Not all of those who witnessed the event will see (or care about) the results. Several may end up knowing it was ok, more will never get that part of the story, and anyone who did not witness the whole event will only read the first few lines and think how stupid for someone to be walking down the street with a gun. On this forum, we all share the same basic views that it is the Constitution that matters. Guns do not scare us. Many others don't even know what the Constitution is; let alone why the 2nd Amendment was included. Heck, most people can't even grasp the concept that "Militia" means them!
In the end, who was "Right" and who was "Wrong" is of little consequence as to who actually WINS. The ones who think and act in a way that garners the most positive perception, gains the votes and wins.
"Quote - As I have already shown, most of the above paragraph is without merit and solely your opinion regardless of the actual facts. I don't want to be a part of your version of the cause sir. I don't damn you for CC and I would fight as hard for your carry method as I would my own, for you to damn mine divides us and makes us weaker so you serve no true purpose to our cause other than to destroy from within. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it"~ Voltaire. The same idealism applies here."
As I stated, I too will fight for your right to OC and I certainly don't damn you for it! Not sure where you got the impression I would not support your right. What I said was a reference to human nature. If you get in my face (the public's) with a belligerent Pro-gun attitude (perception), I, (the public) Will get right back in yours with an Anti-gun attitude. If this is what you are referring to, I did not mean ME. I was illustrating human nature.
Listen, I respect the fact that you and I differ on this. I appreciate your viewpoint and your passion. We (ALL 2nd Amendment, gun loving, country loving, freedom loving folks including BOTH you and I) all need to have that burning passion. I am glad to have you as a brother-in-arms and I am sure you would watch my 6 just as I would watch yours. You want to run a blitz and I want a quarterback sneak. Both plays can be useful and equally effective. The important thing is that we all remain on the same team.
If I gave you the impression that I would not support your cause, then that is in error. My writing skills leave something to be desired. I did not intend to impugn your viewpoint. We are brother; we may fight like cats and dogs with each other, but if someone else (anti’s) tries to land a blow I will defend you to the death.
Peace my friend. Fight the good fight as I will continue to do. Perhaps we shall meet our combined enemy in one final battle and we shall fight side by side like Spartans!
leasantry:
Unfettered Might
Μολών λαβ&
Fair enough analogy, sounds like I have misconstrued some of your points.
You played out the "general public" bit quite passionately and it sounded like you were personally taking their side for the purposes of OC to me.
If you do have the whole of 2A in your heart, then I have no qualms with you. Without it in it's entirety, the rest of the amendments are but just scribblings on a piece of paper.
Hopefully it will never come to such a dramatic endgame, democracy is alive and well in most American's hearts I believe. It's the corrupt politicians and the back room dealings that are ripping America apart at the seams, she's bleeding out and no one in power seems to really care.
Be safe.
You played out the "general public" bit quite passionately and it sounded like you were personally taking their side for the purposes of OC to me.
If you do have the whole of 2A in your heart, then I have no qualms with you. Without it in it's entirety, the rest of the amendments are but just scribblings on a piece of paper.
Hopefully it will never come to such a dramatic endgame, democracy is alive and well in most American's hearts I believe. It's the corrupt politicians and the back room dealings that are ripping America apart at the seams, she's bleeding out and no one in power seems to really care.
Be safe.
Passions run deep when it comes to the 2nd A. I played up the public portion of my e-mail because it is critical if we are to continue to advance our cause. Without them we do not stand a chance.
Since I am new to this forum, do you actually get people that are NOT for the 2ndA? Seems like this would not be a good place for anti's!
Thanks for taking the time to read and understand my message. A little corny to be sure but it is hard to clearly relay meanings and convey understanding with only the written word.
Enjoyed the banter. Keep your finger off the triger.......so it is well rested when needed:victory:
Since I am new to this forum, do you actually get people that are NOT for the 2ndA? Seems like this would not be a good place for anti's!
Thanks for taking the time to read and understand my message. A little corny to be sure but it is hard to clearly relay meanings and convey understanding with only the written word.
Enjoyed the banter. Keep your finger off the triger.......so it is well rested when needed:victory:
Common Sense
I agree with thebrez1.
Even Wyatt Earp enforced checking guns at the city limits. Now was that constitutional?. When I viewed that tape all I kept saying to myself was "that guy is an idiot". More harm done against those of us who carry concealed LEGALLY. Now if I was "up north" in the ruarl areas I would open carry because I have a CPL and the AG of my state has agreed with Michigan constitution that OC is legal, but to walk down "MAIN" street OC is an affront. Right or not. Its not civil. Being civil is what America needs to revive in our selves and our children. It wont happen by carrying guns openly up and down the streets of America. What the F$%# do you want America to look like? Beruit, Palestien, Irac? Hell, we have enough of that Sh@# already with gangs shooting up the neighborhood. Next we will have this same moron "carrying" his AR with sliing to church. He needs to stop watching the Patriot. It is a good movie but I think it has gone to his head. Time to switch the channel.
I agree with thebrez1.
Even Wyatt Earp enforced checking guns at the city limits. Now was that constitutional?. When I viewed that tape all I kept saying to myself was "that guy is an idiot". More harm done against those of us who carry concealed LEGALLY. Now if I was "up north" in the ruarl areas I would open carry because I have a CPL and the AG of my state has agreed with Michigan constitution that OC is legal, but to walk down "MAIN" street OC is an affront. Right or not. Its not civil. Being civil is what America needs to revive in our selves and our children. It wont happen by carrying guns openly up and down the streets of America. What the F$%# do you want America to look like? Beruit, Palestien, Irac? Hell, we have enough of that Sh@# already with gangs shooting up the neighborhood. Next we will have this same moron "carrying" his AR with sliing to church. He needs to stop watching the Patriot. It is a good movie but I think it has gone to his head. Time to switch the channel.
Unfettered Might
Μολών λαβ&
Nope sure wasn't and I'm sure it had no effect on the criminals then either.
So if they told you to turn in your guns tomorrow, would you comply? So are you saying that you would not carry at all if they decided to take your CC away? So your right to self protection is a right given by the state and not a god given right?
That "idiot", as you so eloquently put it, believes in a right granted by god and affirmed by our forefathers. He is willing to stand as an example of a law abiding citizen with a gun while you are content to take the "rights" given to you by your state? It's because of people like that "idiot" that you even have a CC. Don't be a sheep in wolf's clothing, it's unbecoming of an American.
I think you should look up the definition of civility and then tell me how it applies. I OC everywhere I go and all people get are yes sirs and no ma'ams, hold doors open for women and smile at children, I am very civil and the gun on my hip doesn't take that away from me or him. To be uncivil with a gun would be to wave it recklessly about, not just carrying it in a holster. To accuse a man of idiocy, because he chooses to enjoy his 2A his way, is both derogative and uncivil and not in keeping with the idealism of a free country.
The first part I wholeheartedly agree and it is but a small component of what America needs. What America also needs is far less people, either forcing or wishing they could force, how they believe simple rights should be expressed by fellow Americans. The latter part has no basis in fact either way, it's a tool for self defense, nothing more, nothing less.
Do you really want to draw parallels between an OCer and the scum that propagate death and destruction? If you really want to juxtapose societal differences, try comparing apples to apples.
If he so chooses and the pastor approves, why not? Although I agree the AR would be a bit over the top, that's just my opinion and it's not my place to decide for him, because it's an absolute right and it's my duty as an American to respect it.
utimmer43
New member
I believe more peaceable citizens with enough balls to OC is exactly what we need. What better way to revive civility than for every law abiding man and woman to be visibly armed.
larrywarren1965
New member
Apparently this guy isn't amember of NRA, all the bad guys carry concealed at you know I have one with it being in open, I hope that guy wins all the people involved in his detainment need to be fired
PX4storm
Banned
Go away ..... people like you are the reason this nation is in the state it is, IF OPEN CARRY IS ALLOWED THEN THERE IS NO REASON TO DETAIN THIS PERSON ........... IN OTHER WORDS WE ARE NOT LIVING IN A FREE NATION
New Threads
-
Reloading Newbie Here—What’s the Real Cost Advantage?
- Started by michaelstrahan
- Replies: 4
-
-
Open Carry vs. Concealed Carry: Which Do You Prefer and Why?
- Started by lukem
- Replies: 1
-
How often do you practice drawing from concealment, and what drills do you use?
- Started by lukem
- Replies: 0
-
Which concealed carry holster brand or model do you trust the most, and why?
- Started by lukem
- Replies: 4
Forum statistics
Share this page
