G'dale Mike
Member
Probably banned open carry to keep dude on left out of buffet line
Well, honestly, I don't want to "guide" the open carry movement at all. What I want is for people to deal with open carry idiots like they do with so many other idiots and not make this some kind of issue that "needs" more legislation or guidance.
Who's this we? You got a mouse in your pocket?
From my experiences in life, guys who go out of their way to be obnoxious enjoy it. And they won't be guided, led, encouraged or endure any attempt otherwise to alter their behavior. This is a fad, a phase, and it'll pass like all fads do. If it doesn't, we'll see more and more business posted no guns, and obnoxious jerks like these will find themselves isolated and alone.
...And that is what led to the passage of the Mulford Act in California.Rights carry with them certain responsibilities. Push the envelope and expect them to be clipped.
Even in my community, during deer season, had some knucklehead walked into one of our local cafes carrying a military rifle (M1 Garand/Carbine, M-14, M-16), UNSLUNG, folks would not have approved. While the sight of a pack of teens walking the railroad tracks with their .22 rifles didn't alarm folk, there was a norm. There still is.I grew up in a rural area in the 1960's and 70's. Vehicles with guns in window-mount racks were more common then. Their disappearance has more to do with prevention of theft than it does with guns being stigmatized, I'd say. One did occasionally see people out walking around with rifles back then. One still does, in the same context, today. Drive any of the back rural roads in Western Pennsylvania during the hunting seasons and you'll see people walking around with rifles, or shotguns, or archery tackle. Even Amish people.
It has never, in my lifetime, been common for people to just be out strolling around town, going into eateries and other places of business while toting long arms. I've never seen any old news reels, or photographs, that indicate it ever was. Any old-timey stuff with guns in the picture inevitably seems to have deceased game animals in the frame, too.
Well if two pinheads can make a major impact for all gun folk then what do we really have, an illusion?Yes, I remember it. And why did it still not keep CFA's executive from backing down? Because of money, just like the Chipotle matter. If you force a business to choose between money and something else, it will almost always choose money. The OC morons put Chipotle in that position, and Chipotle made the predictable choice.
The people that carried the long guns in Chipolte did not do it for advancement of rights. They did not do it to protect their rights.Again, people can po-po them all they want, but pro-gun rights people have ZERO ability to stop them. NONE. ZILCH. ZIP. NADA.
Therefore, the best response is to GUIDE them by working with them in constructive ways. Otherwise, they will just ignore their critics and do what they want regardless of any attempt to shame them. Promoting legislation against it only cuts our own throats, so it's our only viable option.
Well if two pinheads can make a major impact for all gun folk then what do we really have, an illusion?
Probably banned open carry to keep dude on left out of buffet line
Above link said:"We want to normalize carrying of guns," says Jeung, seen above with his son Jarrett. "like carrying a cell phone or a pager."
The people that carried the long guns in Chipolte did not do it for advancement of rights. They did not do it to protect their rights.
They did it completely to get attention. They did it for selfish reasons. They did it because they are immature and ignorant.
If you think they did it for any reason other that wanting it to be about them, then you are really have issues understanding how things work
That's entirely possible -- illusions or delusions, at least within the ranks of some so-called RKBA "activists."huntsman said:Well if two pinheads can make a major impact for all gun folk then what do we really have, an illusion?
If you read some of their facebook posts they pretty much tell you exactly what is going on in their minds. No telepathy needed.It's great to know that you have telepathy and know exactly what was going on in their minds.
Joe Demko said:Anybody who answers "Because I can!" wins a no-prize with clusters for not answering the question but feeling like he just had to say something anyway.
Step one in getting all of us on the same page here might be for somebody to clearly and concisely articulate why anybody, let alone Neckbeard and Kushh, should find it prudent to carry a TAPCOed out SKS into a suburban USA restaurant. I've been doing this gun activist thing a while now, so I'm familiar with all our side's kewel sound bytes. Just between us gun nuts now, whatever the rights involved may be, just what is the point of open carrying a rifle? Anybody who answers "Because I can!" wins a no-prize with clusters for not answering the question but feeling like he just had to say something anyway.
You are, of course, correct. This is why it is not a big deal that Chipotle took an anti-gun stance. It's so safe there, nobody would EVER need a gun.So...Chipotle is a high-risk environment where the greater effectiveness of the TAPCOed out SKS could mean the difference between life and death? This sounds like something from "Golgo-13 and the Search for the Perfect Patrol Rifle."
Au contraire. It is a big deal that a national chain is now anti because of two cartoon characters.
It scarcely matters, though, whether it was because they are attention whores or because they are utterly unable to judge realistic threat levels. I don't know about Neckbeard, but Kushh owns a handgun that I suspect would have sufficed as long as he did his part...and all without panicking the rubes!