zxcvbob
Member
If not walking along a dirt road in Bell County, Texas with your kid, where?
In re: "Army vet disarmed of his AR and 1911 by cop"
- Thread starter CoyoteSix
- Start date
- Status
smogmage
Member
Political Correctness heralds the death of our Freedoms.
It's also nothing more than a throwaway line that ignores the demonstrated reality that what we do and how we present ourselves in public has social and political consequences.
TheOld Man
Member
True story with real names: In the mid-1960's I was living in the desert Southwest. The town had some kind of of Pioneer Days event going on. Wyatt Earp, grandson (?) of the original, was demonstrating his famous quick draws. During a break in his renowned quick draw demonstration he went into a nearby small store to get a snack.
He walked in wearing his famous pearl-handled revolvers.
The manager and the clerks freaked out.
He was ordered out of the store with those guns.
Despite knowing full well they were loaded with blanks.
He had to hand his gunbelt to an assistant who waited outside the door while he bought his Pepsi and sandwich.
He walked in wearing his famous pearl-handled revolvers.
The manager and the clerks freaked out.
He was ordered out of the store with those guns.
Despite knowing full well they were loaded with blanks.
He had to hand his gunbelt to an assistant who waited outside the door while he bought his Pepsi and sandwich.
Deaf Smith
Member
Carry concealed so we surprise the robber BEFORE they realize we are armed. The whole POINT OF CONCEALED CARRY IS TO KEEP THE BAD GUYS GUESSING AS TO WHO IS AND WHO ISN'T ARMED.
Got that?
Deaf
Averageman
Member
The thing about watching a video is it has always been edited.
I don't care who did what to whom, two guys opinions collided and here we are.
I dont think either of these guys set out to come to this point, either could have throttled down the machine that brought them here to this point. I would have to place equal blame right up to the point the second Officer arrived.
You see a situation like this you are bound to diffuse it, in my opinion the second Officer only made things worse and his flagging the cranium of his prisoner at that point should get him some time at home unpaid to reflect upon his errors.
I don't care who did what to whom, two guys opinions collided and here we are.
I dont think either of these guys set out to come to this point, either could have throttled down the machine that brought them here to this point. I would have to place equal blame right up to the point the second Officer arrived.
You see a situation like this you are bound to diffuse it, in my opinion the second Officer only made things worse and his flagging the cranium of his prisoner at that point should get him some time at home unpaid to reflect upon his errors.
It's too bad that more people don't understand the difference between, on one hand, political correctness, and, on the other hand, courtesy, manners, decorum and respect.Trung Si said:
I dare say you believe that we had greater freedom 100 or 200 years ago. However, in those days, based on the literature of the times, people generally had better manners, were more respectful of social conventions and generally more self regulated in their social interactions.
Maybe based on the literature. Based on real life? Not likely. I don't think Tory on rebel and rebel on Tory violence, nor situations like bleeding Kansas, show that manners and social conventions were any better than today. Not sure we can say there was more freedom 100-200 years ago either.
Then again...based on literature...go read some stuff the Marquis de Sade wrote....
Is throwing anything in anyone's face generally a good idea? No.
I don't think we can say open carry is always for "show" though. I certainly don't see where it can be said to have been for "show" in the case mentioned in the OP.
Last edited:
What do we know of real life 100 or 200 years ago except what we can know from the literature of the time depicting everyday life? That would include journals, biographies, as well as fiction.HOOfan_1 said:
But inferring daily life from such would be like inferring what daily life is like today from Waco, Virginia Tech, Newton or other such idiosyncratic violence.HOOfan_1 said:
And that's probably true. It would depend on how one looked at freedom.HOOfan_1 said:
Certainly acquisition and possession of firearms wasn't as tightly controlled, except in New York City (and carrying a gun was illegal in Texas, except if on a journey). And there might have been more freedom in some other respects -- unless of course you were Black, Chinese, Italian, Irish, etc.
A hundred years ago, you could freely and legally buy marijuana, opium and other mind altering drugs. But at least today, we can still call into question the wisdom of our current policies on that subject. Of course some folks think the war on drugs is a fine thing, and they are free to say so.
Of course a hundred years ago pornography was tough to come by. It's now freely available. Chalk one up for freedom.
Once upon a time, it was illegal some places in this country to sell an ice cream soda on Sunday. That's how the sundae came to be. And it was also illegal some places here to do other sorts of business on a Sunday.
And during much of our history consensual carnal relationships between persons of different races, or persons of the same gender, or persons who were not married to each other were crimes.
On the other hand, there were fewer zoning and land use laws, fewer taxes, less regulation of business.
It all depends on what freedom means to you.
I'm still curious about the Temple / Texas mountain lions and cougars... I don't think any has been sighted within the last 100yrs or so.
Sorry... OC has it's place. I do OC (or poorly conceal) when hiking in the Olympic Mountains in WA State. No big deal. And I never feel the need to video-tape my OC hike in case a cop shows up so I have a nifty youtube clip.
I like my OC rights for when I actually use/need them. Keeping cops busy with pointless OC'ing an AR15 in populated areas is not the best way to "make friends" for your cause.
And contrary to what some belief here... OC'ing can be banned by a state legislature fairly quickly. Cops are busy and the last thing they want is to follow up on ANOTHER MWAG call and the dude acts like a jerk and puts the clip on youtube....
Sorry... OC has it's place. I do OC (or poorly conceal) when hiking in the Olympic Mountains in WA State. No big deal. And I never feel the need to video-tape my OC hike in case a cop shows up so I have a nifty youtube clip.
I like my OC rights for when I actually use/need them. Keeping cops busy with pointless OC'ing an AR15 in populated areas is not the best way to "make friends" for your cause.
And contrary to what some belief here... OC'ing can be banned by a state legislature fairly quickly. Cops are busy and the last thing they want is to follow up on ANOTHER MWAG call and the dude acts like a jerk and puts the clip on youtube....
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
FWIW, that doesn't appear to be the motive in this case. I can't even imagine how easily this guy could've been railroaded had he not had the foresight to have his son get it on video after being confronted by the officer. Faulty dashcams, and whatall.
And that is the real reason why open carry needs to be legal. It's the only way to truly protect people's conceal-carry rights, get it? I don't want to CCW in Texas, because I can be arrested if I'm blown (the laws have been made a bit better, but there's still a scary grey area). Would you drive a car if you could go to jail for not driving exactly the speed limit at all times? No. The penalties are prohibitive of CCW for many people here in Texas. If we can get people on board with OC, and defeat state governments that limit it, both OC and CCW people are protected, and the question becomes purely one of manners at that point.
Social mores and personal discretion replacing arbitrary laws with fearful penalties; the way it should be, if you truly do trust your fellow man to be free. We get along just fine with police no longer enforcing dress codes, even though people are able to dress like idiots at Walmart without fear of an indecency charge. If OC shouldn't be against the law, we must work against these statutes, which of course involves promoting OC.
Hell, you can't even show off your "BBQ Gun" at a public place here in Texas
As far as "politeness" in the old days; it took a hell of a lot less to set men off into mortal combat back then. Of course, the polite among us put up with a lot more disrespect in the name of decorum today. Perhaps the real question should be; Do we live in a society built more upon respect for eachother, or fear of eachother, compared to our forefathers?
TCB
Last edited:
Sam Cade
Member
Police officers should be treated with the exact same amount of respect and deference as any other municipal employee or public servant, no more no less.
Cop=Sanitation worker=Court Clerk=School Lunch Lady.
Or you.Sam Cade said:
No reason a public servant or municipal employee should be accorded less respect than anyone else.
Frank Ettin said:
Frank Ettin said:
I take your point that actions have consequences, but one man's political correctness is another man's courtesy, manners, etc.
If we exercise our "rights", to coarse and offensive speech or open carry, at the whim of our government or the majority of low information voters, then we should drop the pretense of "rights" and recognize that maintaining our tenuous privileges is an exercise in public relations. The tyranny of the majority is tyranny nevertheless.
Averageman
Member
I live 20 minutes from the location where this took place and yes there are Coyotes, Hogs and some people claim that there have been Cougars sighted. I have spoken to someone I work with who claimed he saw one as he was driving in to work and he was about 500 yds behind my truck.
But thats neither here nor there now is it?
So, if you are sure there aren't any threats from wildlife, in this case what does your opinion matter? He felt a threat, that should be enough.
It's like some anti saying, "You don't need to own a handgun."
Lets face it no matter what you do today you are going to offend someone.
But thats neither here nor there now is it?
So, if you are sure there aren't any threats from wildlife, in this case what does your opinion matter? He felt a threat, that should be enough.
It's like some anti saying, "You don't need to own a handgun."
Lets face it no matter what you do today you are going to offend someone.
Deltaboy1984
Member
After watching the video 5 times I have one question to ask: When did Leo's get to believing they have the right to act Rudely to a man who is just taking a walk with his son. Regardless of the gun issue.
Averageman
Member
Thats part of the problem, but I see it on both sides.
I'm pretty respectful to LEO's in general; but at what point in a conversation does it begin and end with mutual respect?
Look, I would have cleared the AR as I approached him, stopped, dumped the mag and cleared the chamber and left it locked open.
But I have to ask, at what point do you feel that compliance gets lost to feeling like this guy is on a power trip?
I'm pretty respectful to LEO's in general; but at what point in a conversation does it begin and end with mutual respect?
Look, I would have cleared the AR as I approached him, stopped, dumped the mag and cleared the chamber and left it locked open.
But I have to ask, at what point do you feel that compliance gets lost to feeling like this guy is on a power trip?
Bonesinium
Member
Neither.
I conceal to avoid the very thing that video showed. I don't wish to be harassed and/or arrested just because of some over zealous cop who has an ego and/or doesn't know/care about the law. That reason alone.
I do open carry occasionally. And it has nothing to do with provoking anyone. Some times people open carry because they cannot legally conceal, it is more comfortable, or it is a firearm that cannot be or cannot very well be concealed.
You shouldn't have to tailer your lawful activity to cater to the ignorant.
Nonetheless, such actions still have consequences. If you act in accordance with your professed beliefs those consequences might well not be to your (or our) liking.316SS said:
Too many in the RKBA community seem to miss the reality that many people who don't own guns don't understand us, are afraid of us and will look to the government to allay their fears. That is where gun control laws come from. And the more they fear us the more readily they will vote for politicians who promise to enact gun control laws.
Make no mistake that the politicians who are proposing and voting for gun control legislation are doing what the people who put them in office want them to do. And unless we can make some headway with public perception, we will continue to see increasing support for more draconian gun control legislation.
We can to some extent beat these forces back in the courts, but that is a laborious, slow and expensive process. It also will not be 100% effective.
If our real goal is to make some headway in the RKBA, we need to focus on that and start doing things well calculate to advance our interests. And we need to get smarter about how we do that.
The-Reaver
Member
Open carry should be allowed.
Those of you saying one shouldn't are being the Fed. and infringing.
AT EASE if they or I want to open then I can, if not then I won't. Get my drift. Stop imposing your feelings on others.
Those of you saying one shouldn't are being the Fed. and infringing.
AT EASE if they or I want to open then I can, if not then I won't. Get my drift. Stop imposing your feelings on others.
The question isn't whether open carry should be allowed. Of course it should.The-Reaver said:
The question is whether open carry can be a useful tool in the furtherance of the RKBA, i. e., whether it has positive political value.
If you think it can and it does, let's see some evidence. In post 20, I outlined some reasons why it appears to be unlikely to further the RKBA.
Last edited:
smogmage
Member
I think the problem we are having with your sentiment is that you are essentially saying exercising your Right to OC wont lead to the furtherence of our right to keep and bear arms. Its akin to saying exercising your right to yell openly in the street whatever you want will lead to restrictions on your freedom of speach. A Right isn't a Right if we have to tiptoe around on eggshells with it. I may not like what most people have to say, but they have the Right to say it should they choose to. Big daddy government has no right to regulate any part of it.
- Status
