XD40scinNC
New member
I carry how I want to carry. Don't like it..... well that's your problem, not mine.
The only real reason anyone carries concealed.
- Thread starter Blueshell
- Start date
- Status
Blueshell
Banned
Carrying concealed to avoid being disarmed alltogether is the very reason I've been saying is the only valid reason.
Please do carry concealed if your state bans OC. Please also carry concealed into post offices, school zones, liquor stores, cassinos, past no-gun signs that have force of law, etc.
Blueshell
Banned
This isn't about ability or preferences. I'm seeking a deeper discussion on the underlaying rational behind our verious regulations.
Interesting take on this, but I see some flaws.
A counter attack would presume that an attack has already begun and possibly even ended. If that is so, then yes, using your weapon, regardless of how it is carried, could be considered retaliation.
However, if the attack on you is initiated and the weapon is presented in effort to thwart the attack or prevent bodily harm to yourself, it is then defensive.
Concealing a weapon with the intent of doing harm to another person is quite different that concealing a firearm and only presenting it when threatened.
The first important line in the Monthly Law Journal Article "Pointing weapons in the absence of a threat".
Pointing your weapon after being threatened by someone intending harm upon you is a different issue altogether.
The real deal is that if openly carrying is the only way to carry defensively, then there would be many men and women that have defended themselves and were then prosecuted. I have not seen that to be the case.
I still don't care what you think, and will continue to carry as I please, but I do care when you put forward information that misleads others.
A counter attack would presume that an attack has already begun and possibly even ended. If that is so, then yes, using your weapon, regardless of how it is carried, could be considered retaliation.
However, if the attack on you is initiated and the weapon is presented in effort to thwart the attack or prevent bodily harm to yourself, it is then defensive.
Concealing a weapon with the intent of doing harm to another person is quite different that concealing a firearm and only presenting it when threatened.
The first important line in the Monthly Law Journal Article "Pointing weapons in the absence of a threat".
Pointing your weapon after being threatened by someone intending harm upon you is a different issue altogether.
The real deal is that if openly carrying is the only way to carry defensively, then there would be many men and women that have defended themselves and were then prosecuted. I have not seen that to be the case.
I still don't care what you think, and will continue to carry as I please, but I do care when you put forward information that misleads others.
Carrying into a post office is a federal offense.
Blueshell
Banned
Yes, it is.
Helping escaped slaves was once a federal offence, too. Do you support everything that is legal and oppose everything that is illegal? Have you surrendered full ethical sovereignty over to the government or do you retain some meashure of judgment?
I hope you never have to use your "Helping escaped slaves" defense in court, but if you do, best of luck to you.
As far as retaining some measure of judgement. I would say you need to look at that statement before suggesting to someone that they willfully violate a federal law.
No I do not agree with this and many other laws. but they are laws and telling someone to disregard them is irresponsible at the very least.
Respond if you wish, but I'm done with your nonsense.
Blueshell
Banned
This thread is not about legal stratagies.
I have, continualy over years and ongoing. I also fully support and condone tax evasion, but like legal stratagies, this thread is not about that.
I'll try to reach the recent shooting victims in California to see if they agree with you.
That remains your choice.
XD40scinNC
New member
Here is an opportunity for you to change the law, OC into your local post office and when arrested, charged, tried in court you can then appeal all the way to the SCOTUS and remedy this unjust law. It might nice to be independently wealth to allow you to afford the lawyers you will need.
For the once or twice a year I find myself in a post office, I'll just leave my gun in the car. Make of it what you will, throw all the insults you can manage my way, I don't give a damn about your opinion.
Blueshell
Banned
This thread is not about changing the law and I am not one of your 'cold dead hands' anyway.
While it's been some time since I've been in a post office, the only launderymat within 40 miles of me does have no-gun postings which, in this state, do carry force of law. I carry concealed past them into the business every weekend.
mikestone967
Banned
Blueshell
Banned
Presintation is use. To present is to use lethal force.
Concealed carry requires one to go directly to using force.
The article was offered as a proof that pointing a weapon is to use force. Presence or absence of a threat was not an item we were discussing when the artical was given, for presence or absence of a threat to be something needing adress. This part of your post is irrelevant.
Prove the law follows logic and is consistent, for your point here to be true.
I don't require you to care nore do I require you to carry openly. This thread is about the underlaying rational, not an attempt to make or prevent any behavior.
***
You took the time to make a post which has nothing to do with anything.
mikestone967
Banned
Wrong. Depending on the state, it's brandishing a weapon, nothing more.
Wrong. Again.
Blueshell;599300The article was offered as a proof that pointing a weapon is to use force. Presence or absence of a threat was not an item we were discussing when the artical was given said:
Not an uncommon reply around here when you ask someone to back up their ramblings with proof and fact.
See, everybody has some common ground
Blueshell
Banned
Point taken. Are you arguing that brandishing is a valid reason to carry concealed? If not, then there's no point in highlighting it.
Lack of prosecution doesn't mean something is legal. As a proof, the ATF prosecuts less than 2% of all felony purgery incidents with Form 4473. That doesn't mean purgering yourself on that document is legal, it just means the ATF isn't even doing the job liberals want it to do. As another proof, every single person who consumed marjuana in Colorado in full compliance with Colorado State law, and bought a gun from an FFL in the same time period, has comitted felony purgery since Form 4473 is a Federal document and marjuana is illegal federally.
All of those people have comitted feliny acts. The ATF's lack of prosecution doesn't change the legal nature.
In order for the claim you're defending to be true, you would have to prove that the government always catches every perpetrator AND always prosecuts every crime; no differed prosecution, no dropped charges, no plea deals, no corruption.
I am the only person in the whole world who gets to decide which replies suit my approval. It's MY approval.
mikestone967
Banned
But it's an open forum. "You" don't decide what I post.
Your approval is not needed either.
Blueshell
Banned
I never claimed to decide for you. I spicificaly said this thread is not intended to force or prevent any behavior. Any behavior, from how you carry to how you post to how you wipe your ass. I don't see what part of that is unclear. This forum's admin decides who can post what. That's how forums work. You aren't the first to react as if I'm trying to force you to or not to do something. Why do you fear I have a power to reach through the Internet into your mind and force you to do my bidding?
To my knowledge this forum's admin has not established that any member's approval is required for any other member to post any content. Why do you assume that such an approval process exists, to then try to disqualify me from it?
Please let me know when you would like to resume the actual thread topic
mikestone967
Banned
I never claimed to decide for you. I spicificaly said this thread is not intended to force or prevent any behavior. Any behavior, from how you carry to how you post to how you wipe your ass. I don't see what part of that is unclear. This forum's admin decides who can post what. That's how forums work. You aren't the first to react as if I'm trying to force you to or not to do something. Why do you fear I have a power to reach through the Internet into your mind and force you to do my bidding?
To my knowledge this forum's admin has not established that any member's approval is required for any other member to post any content. Why do you assume that such an approval process exists, to then try to disqualify me from it?
Please let me know when you would like to resume the actual thread topic
No need for the foul mouth postings....
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
- Status
