Well THAT will end well...(Armed March On Washington)

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT
 

Realitycrash:

I am questioning that as well. I am just wondering why you support armed citizens breaking the law (bringing carried weapons into a no-carry zone)?

I suppose because there's only one thing that's sacrosanct in the US legislation.

That amendment.

The One Amendment.

TO RULE THEM ALL.

So, it's okay to wipe one's behind with any piece of legislation they want, as long as they don't touch that amendment. At least that's the vibe I get sometimes.

I find it hypocritical, really, how it's OK to break a piece of legislation you disagree with...but woe betide whoever would argue the piece you personally support isn't all it's cracked up to be.

LifeCharacter:

And I'm sure your firearms will do so much good against the full force of the government.

It wouldn't just be ME vs the FULL FORCE of the government. It would be millions of people collectively. They simply don't have enough hardware to deal with that, however fancy it may be. Furthermore, I am veteran, I know exactly what their capabilities are. Thanks.

xDarc:
It wouldn't just be ME vs the FULL FORCE of the government. It would be millions of people collectively. They simply don't have enough hardware to deal with that, however fancy it may be.

And what will millions of people collectively do with their personal sidearms? Last time I checked the US military had a lot of guns, and are capable of purchasing a lot more guns if they found those guns lacking.

Furthermore, I am veteran, I know exactly what their capabilities are. Thanks.

And what were you during your service that makes you think that you know what the military is fully capable of when they're fighting a domestic war against rebels?

Vegosiux:
So, it's okay to wipe one's behind with any piece of legislation they want, as long as they don't touch that amendment. At least that's the vibe I get sometimes.

I find it hypocritical, really, how it's OK to break a piece of legislation you disagree with...but woe betide whoever would argue the piece you personally support isn't all it's cracked up to be.

The entire point is to raise awareness, and unless you are not familiar with it, the US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Technically any legislation that violates it isn't worth the ink that signed it into law.

I'm not giving a blanket pass for the amendment to allow for whatever people want, but consider that there is more law supporting open carry in the U.S. than there is for Obamacare or gay marriage. It's not a fringe movement; open carry is widely American. The handful of places that refuse to permit it are actually in the minority. And just like gay marriage, when the laws do go on the books, people realize that it's not anything like its critics allege it is, nor does society go to hell when normal people realize rights they've been denied.

I'm not even going to comment on the whole gun debate that is currently de-railing this whole thread.

I will saw that an open carry march with ARMED WEAPONS is an incredibly fucking stupid idea.

I think this is the stupidest fucking idea I have ever read actually.

So all I can say is Congratulations Adam Kokesh, you have come up with something so stupid I don't think I could ever top it. I only hope the people who give out Darwin awards pay attention.

and also

image

Kopikatsu:
200,000 people die each year from medical errors in the US.

A number that was only even discovered after the recent introduction of laws like this one, which are enabling hospitals to actually address the causes of those medical mistakes such as overworked surgical teams.

Still better than, you know, the freezing research into gun violence.

Alcohol kills 75,000 a year

Which is why you have drinking age laws, DUI laws, public intoxication laws, etc.

Smoking kills 440,000 per year.

Which is why there are massive taxes on cigarettes and bans on indoor smoking in many parts of the US, sometimes up to 25 feet from doors and windows.

But no, forget those things. It's the 30,000 deaths a year from guns that we should freak out about.

How many people die in the US from terrorism? You have no problem freaking out about that.

What about plane hijackings? Almost non-existent. You don't need airport screeners.

And, hell only 32,000 people died in traffic accidents in 2011. You don't need traffic or seat belt laws anyways...

I mean, seriously, why do anything about anything?

Realitycrash:

Ryotknife:
[quote="Nikolaz72" post="528.407475.17077220"]

Also, since when is hunting immoral? Especially since there are many Americans that count on that supplemental income, especially in the rural areas.

Killing stuff for shits n giggles?
Killing stuff in order to sell their body?
Killing stuff in order to just eat it?

Yeah, I think it's immoral. I don't care for any gun-debate, but killing animals just because you can? Yeah, I disapprove.

soo...you disapprove anyone who eats animals or plants.

okay, kinda weird, especially considering you have probably killed millions if not billions of organisms in your lifetime.

Ryotknife:

Realitycrash:

Ryotknife:
[quote="Nikolaz72" post="528.407475.17077220"]

Also, since when is hunting immoral? Especially since there are many Americans that count on that supplemental income, especially in the rural areas.

Killing stuff for shits n giggles?
Killing stuff in order to sell their body?
Killing stuff in order to just eat it?

Yeah, I think it's immoral. I don't care for any gun-debate, but killing animals just because you can? Yeah, I disapprove.

soo...you disapprove anyone who eats animals or plants.

okay, kinda weird, especially considering you have probably killed millions if not billions of organisms in your lifetime.

No. They said they despise the idea of killing animals just for the fun of it. There's hunting for food, hunting for supplies, and hunting to hunt.

Hunting for the sake of hunting is the real kicker.

Abomination:

Ryotknife:

Realitycrash:

Killing stuff for shits n giggles?
Killing stuff in order to sell their body?
Killing stuff in order to just eat it?

Yeah, I think it's immoral. I don't care for any gun-debate, but killing animals just because you can? Yeah, I disapprove.

soo...you disapprove anyone who eats animals or plants.

okay, kinda weird, especially considering you have probably killed millions if not billions of organisms in your lifetime.

No. They said they despise the idea of killing animals just for the fun of it. There's hunting for food, hunting for supplies, and hunting to hunt.

Hunting for the sake of hunting is the real kicker.

okay thanks for clearing that up. I assumed he had an issue with people who hunt for supplemental income (ie those who sell or use the meat) as that was what I mentioned previously.

xDarc:

LifeCharacter:

And I'm sure your firearms will do so much good against the full force of the government.

It wouldn't just be ME vs the FULL FORCE of the government. It would be millions of people collectively. They simply don't have enough hardware to deal with that, however fancy it may be. Furthermore, I am veteran, I know exactly what their capabilities are. Thanks.

Sorry mate, but did you not say a few days ago that you dropped out of basic, I am honestly asking, because it may be that I misread your post. If so, the term veteran may then mean something different in the US, but in Aus it means a returned serviceman/woman.

xDarc:

LifeCharacter:

And I'm sure your firearms will do so much good against the full force of the government.

It wouldn't just be ME vs the FULL FORCE of the government. It would be millions of people collectively. They simply don't have enough hardware to deal with that, however fancy it may be. Furthermore, I am veteran, I know exactly what their capabilities are. Thanks.

Assuming it was, it'd be millions of people in various groups against other millions of people in various groups, with many more in the middle wanting to keep out of it and government forces on various sides.

And that's assuming that whatever puts you at loggerheads with the government also puts lots of other people, which is not necessarily true.

Ryotknife:

Abomination:

Ryotknife:

soo...you disapprove anyone who eats animals or plants.

okay, kinda weird, especially considering you have probably killed millions if not billions of organisms in your lifetime.

No. They said they despise the idea of killing animals just for the fun of it. There's hunting for food, hunting for supplies, and hunting to hunt.

Hunting for the sake of hunting is the real kicker.

okay thanks for clearing that up. I assumed he had an issue with people who hunt for supplemental income (ie those who sell or use the meat) as that was what I mentioned previously.

I disapprove of eating meat, yes (though I actually find hunting to be a slightly better option than some of worse meat-farms we got going. You know, where animals live in small, shitty and overcrowded rooms, etc). I have no idea where you got 'plants' from? You 'gather' plants, you don't 'hunt' them. But whatever.

Not all organisms are equal, for not all organisms are sufficiently evolved to feel pain or experience psychological horror, loss, alienation, etc. Please don't try to equate animals with bacteria or plants.

But I am fine that others eat meat (or hunt). I occasionally do it too (eat meat, that is), for practical reasons. I still don't consider it moral, though, for it's unnecessary.

AgedGrunt:

Vegosiux:
So, it's okay to wipe one's behind with any piece of legislation they want, as long as they don't touch that amendment. At least that's the vibe I get sometimes.

I find it hypocritical, really, how it's OK to break a piece of legislation you disagree with...but woe betide whoever would argue the piece you personally support isn't all it's cracked up to be.

The entire point is to raise awareness, and unless you are not familiar with it, the US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Technically any legislation that violates it isn't worth the ink that signed it into law.

I'm not giving a blanket pass for the amendment to allow for whatever people want, but consider that there is more law supporting open carry in the U.S. than there is for Obamacare or gay marriage. It's not a fringe movement; open carry is widely American. The handful of places that refuse to permit it are actually in the minority. And just like gay marriage, when the laws do go on the books, people realize that it's not anything like its critics allege it is, nor does society go to hell when normal people realize rights they've been denied.

If it is so common-place and so American, why don't they simply vote it out of the system or wait until the lobby-business crushes their opponents?

the clockmaker:

xDarc:

LifeCharacter:

And I'm sure your firearms will do so much good against the full force of the government.

It wouldn't just be ME vs the FULL FORCE of the government. It would be millions of people collectively. They simply don't have enough hardware to deal with that, however fancy it may be. Furthermore, I am veteran, I know exactly what their capabilities are. Thanks.

Sorry mate, but did you not say a few days ago that you dropped out of basic, I am honestly asking, because it may be that I misread your post. If so, the term veteran may then mean something different in the US, but in Aus it means a returned serviceman/woman.

I completed my training but was thrown out in the last week when blabbing to a colonel about a fight that got covered up. So no, I am not a veteran in the sense that I served my country honorably, but I did complete all of my training. It is shameful and I do not really like to think back on it.

xDarc:
I completed my training but was thrown out in the last week when blabbing to a colonel about a fight that got covered up. So no, I am not a veteran in the sense that I served my country honorably, but I did complete all of my training. It is shameful and I do not really like to think back on it.

Isn't Basic just supposed to be a basic (obviously) rundown of military training coupled with psychological pressure to condition soldiers-to-be to the actual military training that comes after you graduate from it?

I was kicked out during the last week AIT, advanced infantry training. Basic is a lot more simple, about 8 weeks. I did 5 months which includes weapons and battle systems.

xDarc:

the clockmaker:

xDarc:

It wouldn't just be ME vs the FULL FORCE of the government. It would be millions of people collectively. They simply don't have enough hardware to deal with that, however fancy it may be. Furthermore, I am veteran, I know exactly what their capabilities are. Thanks.

Sorry mate, but did you not say a few days ago that you dropped out of basic, I am honestly asking, because it may be that I misread your post. If so, the term veteran may then mean something different in the US, but in Aus it means a returned serviceman/woman.

I completed my training but was thrown out in the last week when blabbing to a colonel about a fight that got covered up. So no, I am not a veteran in the sense that I served my country honorably, but I did complete all of my training. It is shameful and I do not really like to think back on it.

Sorry mate, but in that case, don't you think that it is inaccurate and misleading to characterise yourself as a veteran? I mean you are claiming the title of one who has served in combat in order to lend your opinions weight that they simply are not due and to me that is not cool.

Capatcha, be serious now. Indeed, surely you would know of the discrepency between a veteran and a non-qualified trainee, because basic tends to bash that sort of thing into people and most civilians can think up at least a rough reason that they are different, this indicates to me that you intended to mislead with your post.

If you say so. Veteran doesn't mean combat, it means military service, and rather than qualify my experience I use something open ended. I do receive mail from the department of veterans affairs, I have no idea why. I shouldn't be eligible for any benefits but they keep offering stuff. Anyway, im not gonna bother responding to this anymore. You should be surprised I acknowledged it at all.

the clockmaker:

Sorry mate, but in that case, don't you think that it is inaccurate and misleading to characterise yourself as a veteran? I mean you are claiming the title of one who has served in combat in order to lend your opinions weight that they simply are not due and to me that is not cool.

Capatcha, be serious now. Indeed, surely you would know of the discrepency between a veteran and a non-qualified trainee, because basic tends to bash that sort of thing into people and most civilians can think up at least a rough reason that they are different, this indicates to me that you intended to mislead with your post.

If xDarc completed Basic then he was a soldier. In the US the term veteran isn't necessarily limited to soldiers who saw combat. All that matters is that he finished Basic training.

On Topic:

This illegal march is a stupid idea. Parse details any way you want but put 1000 armed, disorganized civilians in a crowd and you're asking for trouble.

Realitycrash:
If it is so common-place and so American, why don't they simply vote it out of the system or wait until the lobby-business crushes their opponents?

I'm not sure what you mean by "vote it out of the system" or "lobby-business". There is a gun rights lobby just as there is a gun control lobby; both are powerful. There are always hold-outs. We will see this with gay marriage, and honestly I'm in favor of it happening this way.

Ideally, we'd have a Supreme Court with accreditation and integrity. Because we don't, legal fights will drag on much longer than they have a right to, and drag the people under in the process.

dumbseizure:
I will saw that an open carry march with ARMED WEAPONS is an incredibly fucking stupid idea.

I do not believe you have grasped the concept of open-carry. Much of the eyeball-popping reaction is the result of people who have never been exposed to this practice. It's silly reactions like this that caused one incident here in the States where someone filed a complaint to a restaurant manager that armed detectives made them uncomfortable. That group was asked to leave.

AgedGrunt:

dumbseizure:
I will saw that an open carry march with ARMED WEAPONS is an incredibly fucking stupid idea.

I do not believe you have grasped the concept of open-carry. Much of the eyeball-popping reaction is the result of people who have never been exposed to this practice. It's silly reactions like this that caused one incident here in the States where someone filed a complaint to a restaurant manager that armed detectives made them uncomfortable. That group was asked to leave.

No, I grasp the concept of open-carry.

You honestly don't see anything wrong with potentially thousand of people marching all at once into Washington, protesting the "tyrannous acts" of a not so tyrannous government while also carrying firearms?

So no, I stick with my logical assertion, and will still say that an open carry march onto the streets of Washington with potentially thousands of firearms thrown into the fray....is a stupid fucking idea.

xDarc:
If you say so. Veteran doesn't mean combat, it means military service, and rather than qualify my experience I use something open ended. I do receive mail from the department of veterans affairs, I have no idea why. I shouldn't be eligible for any benefits but they keep offering stuff. Anyway, im not gonna bother responding to this anymore. You should be surprised I acknowledged it at all.

Copper Zen:

the clockmaker:

Sorry mate, but in that case, don't you think that it is inaccurate and misleading to characterise yourself as a veteran? I mean you are claiming the title of one who has served in combat in order to lend your opinions weight that they simply are not due and to me that is not cool.

Capatcha, be serious now. Indeed, surely you would know of the discrepency between a veteran and a non-qualified trainee, because basic tends to bash that sort of thing into people and most civilians can think up at least a rough reason that they are different, this indicates to me that you intended to mislead with your post.

If xDarc completed Basic then he was a soldier. In the US the term veteran isn't necessarily limited to soldiers who saw combat. All that matters is that he finished Basic training.

On Topic:

This illegal march is a stupid idea. Parse details any way you want but put 1000 armed, disorganized civilians in a crowd and you're asking for trouble.

In that case I withdraw the inaccurate comment, as I am coming from an Australian perspective where veteran absolutely requires that you have served in an active conflict area and you do not really 'count' as a soldier until you have completed your trade training, up until that point you are still a trainee and certaintly not capable of bludgeoning people with your superior experience.

That being said, I maintain that its usage was in fact misleading as the obvious connontation is of an experienced soldier, something that I can say with absolute confidence that failing to complete initial employment training does not qualify one for. I know that 5 months experience did not give me the nessecary perspective on the military to make authoritative statements as to capability. You spend the first 6 months learning new and exciting things and the next 6 months learning that you know very little.

In addition, I maintain that the statement was wilfully misleading and that you intended to use the term veteran to lend your oppinion weight that it was not due as you are fully aware of the connotations of the term veteran, fully aware of the expectations that would come with that in commenting as to capability and fully aware that at no point were you actually a usable asset to the defence force.

the clockmaker:
In that case I withdraw the inaccurate comment, as I am coming from an Australian perspective where veteran absolutely requires that you have served in an active conflict area and you do not really 'count' as a soldier until you have completed your trade training, up until that point you are still a trainee and certaintly not capable of bludgeoning people with your superior experience.

That being said, I maintain that its usage was in fact misleading as the obvious connontation is of an experienced soldier, something that I can say with absolute confidence that failing to complete initial employment training does not qualify one for. I know that 5 months experience did not give me the nessecary perspective on the military to make authoritative statements as to capability. You spend the first 6 months learning new and exciting things and the next 6 months learning that you know very little.

In addition, I maintain that the statement was wilfully misleading and that you intended to use the term veteran to lend your oppinion weight that it was not due as you are fully aware of the connotations of the term veteran, fully aware of the expectations that would come with that in commenting as to capability and fully aware that at no point were you actually a usable asset to the defence force.

Yeah, I'm going to second that, it was quite a surprise reading xDarc saying he'd not quite completed training after he'd described himself as a veteran in several other threads.

the clockmaker:
snip

thaluikhain:

Yeah, I'm going to second that, it was quite a surprise reading xDarc saying he'd not quite completed training after he'd described himself as a veteran in several other threads.

Eh, I've heard the same from others including one guy who was discharged just after finishing basic because of some previously unknown medical problem--a heart Fibrillation or something, I can't recall off the top of my head without calling someone up for the details.

Over half my friends from high school joined one service or another (especially the marines--very proud) and they told me lots of stories about trainees or soldiers whose service was cut short for one reason or another. It happens. They still joined up and earned the right to call themselves soldiers, even if their service was cut short for one reason or another.

Copper Zen:
Eh, I've heard the same from others including one guy who was discharged just after finishing basic because of some previously unknown medical problem--a heart Fibrillation or something, I can't recall off the top of my head without calling someone up for the details.

Over half my friends from high school joined one service or another (especially the marines--very proud) and they told me lots of stories about trainees or soldiers whose service was cut short for one reason or another. It happens. They still joined up and earned the right to call themselves soldiers, even if their service was cut short for one reason or another.

Isn't someone a trainee or cadet and not a soldier until they finish training? I would say so.

In any case, they are most definitely not veterans. I cannot accept someone that has never been on active service as a veteran.

Copper Zen:

the clockmaker:
snip

thaluikhain:

Yeah, I'm going to second that, it was quite a surprise reading xDarc saying he'd not quite completed training after he'd described himself as a veteran in several other threads.

Eh, I've heard the same from others including one guy who was discharged just after finishing basic because of some previously unknown medical problem--a heart Fibrillation or something, I can't recall off the top of my head without calling someone up for the details.

Over half my friends from high school joined one service or another (especially the marines--very proud) and they told me lots of stories about trainees or soldiers whose service was cut short for one reason or another. It happens. They still joined up and earned the right to call themselves soldiers, even if their service was cut short for one reason or another.

...You stepped down from modding? But why?

OT: Veterans need to actually have served in an active conflict area. Anything else is misleading and misuse of a very loaded word.
..And we are very off-topic. Any actual updates on the 4th-July protest?

Realitycrash:

Copper Zen:

the clockmaker:
snip

thaluikhain:

Yeah, I'm going to second that, it was quite a surprise reading xDarc saying he'd not quite completed training after he'd described himself as a veteran in several other threads.

Eh, I've heard the same from others including one guy who was discharged just after finishing basic because of some previously unknown medical problem--a heart Fibrillation or something, I can't recall off the top of my head without calling someone up for the details.

Over half my friends from high school joined one service or another (especially the marines--very proud) and they told me lots of stories about trainees or soldiers whose service was cut short for one reason or another. It happens. They still joined up and earned the right to call themselves soldiers, even if their service was cut short for one reason or another.

...You stepped down from modding? But why?

Was wondering that aswell. What's gonna happend to us without protection? Flamewars might occur, people's feelings may get hurt....

Wonder if we will get a new one.

Realitycrash:

..And we are very off-topic. Any actual updates on the 4th-July protest?

It's probably not going to happen. Both Kokesh and Poe were denied bail, and one of Poe's Panic Hour members, Kyle Prouty, has been illegally searched by the police and also taken into custody with no given reason.

If it's any indication, Adam Kokesh is likely to be 'ghosted' by the Fed as soon as he drops out of the public's mind, which shouldn't be too long considering the American public has a notoriously short attention span. Which would be the best possible outcome, honestly.

Kopikatsu:

Realitycrash:

..And we are very off-topic. Any actual updates on the 4th-July protest?

It's probably not going to happen. Both Kokesh and Poe were denied bail, and one of Poe's Panic Hour members, Kyle Prouty, has been illegally searched by the police and also taken into custody with no given reason.

If it's any indication, Adam Kokesh is likely to be 'ghosted' by the Fed as soon as he drops out of the public's mind, which shouldn't be too long considering the American public has a notoriously short attention span. Which would be the best possible outcome, honestly.

They were arrested for what? Conspiracy To Commit..Something-something? (Whatever the law is called that they would violate). And no bail, really?

Realitycrash:

Kopikatsu:

Realitycrash:

..And we are very off-topic. Any actual updates on the 4th-July protest?

It's probably not going to happen. Both Kokesh and Poe were denied bail, and one of Poe's Panic Hour members, Kyle Prouty, has been illegally searched by the police and also taken into custody with no given reason.

If it's any indication, Adam Kokesh is likely to be 'ghosted' by the Fed as soon as he drops out of the public's mind, which shouldn't be too long considering the American public has a notoriously short attention span. Which would be the best possible outcome, honestly.

They were arrested for what? Conspiracy To Commit..Something-something? (Whatever the law is called that they would violate). And no bail, really?

I don't know about Poe, but Kokesh was charged with non-violently resisting arrest when being taken into custody at a Marijuana rally.

Kopikatsu:

Realitycrash:

Kopikatsu:

It's probably not going to happen. Both Kokesh and Poe were denied bail, and one of Poe's Panic Hour members, Kyle Prouty, has been illegally searched by the police and also taken into custody with no given reason.

If it's any indication, Adam Kokesh is likely to be 'ghosted' by the Fed as soon as he drops out of the public's mind, which shouldn't be too long considering the American public has a notoriously short attention span. Which would be the best possible outcome, honestly.

They were arrested for what? Conspiracy To Commit..Something-something? (Whatever the law is called that they would violate). And no bail, really?

I don't know about Poe, but Kokesh was charged with non-violently resisting arrest when being taken into custody at a Marijuana rally.

Actually Kokesh was charged as having "forcibly assaulted, resisted, opposed, impeded and interfered with officers and employees of the United States, that is, uniformed National Park Service Rangers, while they were engaged in, and on account of, the performance of official duties".

Asita:

Kopikatsu:

Realitycrash:

They were arrested for what? Conspiracy To Commit..Something-something? (Whatever the law is called that they would violate). And no bail, really?

I don't know about Poe, but Kokesh was charged with non-violently resisting arrest when being taken into custody at a Marijuana rally.

Actually Kokesh was charged as having "forcibly assaulted, resisted, opposed, impeded and interfered with officers and employees of the United States, that is, uniformed National Park Service Rangers, while they were engaged in, and on account of, the performance of official duties".

So none of them were charged with planning and encouraging a large-scale criminal event? (I think you can at least get fined for planning a large demonstration without any plans of seeking an approval for it).

Asita:

Kopikatsu:

Realitycrash:

They were arrested for what? Conspiracy To Commit..Something-something? (Whatever the law is called that they would violate). And no bail, really?

I don't know about Poe, but Kokesh was charged with non-violently resisting arrest when being taken into custody at a Marijuana rally.

Actually Kokesh was charged as having "forcibly assaulted, resisted, opposed, impeded and interfered with officers and employees of the United States, that is, uniformed National Park Service Rangers, while they were engaged in, and on account of, the performance of official duties".

I'd heard it was non-violent, but considering who Kokesh is, I could believe that he physically resisted. There is a video of his arrest circulating the web, but I've yet to watch it.

Kopikatsu:

Asita:

Kopikatsu:

I don't know about Poe, but Kokesh was charged with non-violently resisting arrest when being taken into custody at a Marijuana rally.

Actually Kokesh was charged as having "forcibly assaulted, resisted, opposed, impeded and interfered with officers and employees of the United States, that is, uniformed National Park Service Rangers, while they were engaged in, and on account of, the performance of official duties".

I'd heard it was non-violent, but considering who Kokesh is, I could believe that he physically resisted. There is a video of his arrest circulating the web, but I've yet to watch it.

It was a bit twofaced, he was planning, and actively encouraging what he wanted to be tens of thousands of people to actively break the law of a state, possibly endangering civilians of the city in question.

There is probably a law against that somewhere.

That and the protest would not have gotten far (Without going horribly wrong) D.C Police Chief already made a public statement that everyone participating, upon breaking the law of open carry within D.C would be arrested for breaking said law. Is the protest was made clear 'before' the protest the Police had ample time to prepare. Although I dunno if they actually broke any laws before protesting.

dumbseizure:
So no, I stick with my logical assertion, and will still say that an open carry march onto the streets of Washington with potentially thousands of firearms thrown into the fray....is a stupid fucking idea.

I consider it logical to demonstrate what you are fighting for and show people that you exist. If facing arrest, so be it. They are willing to risk that for their rights.

I've my own disagreements (it's basically open-invitation, a huge no-no) but there is one underlying principle about people that open-carry: they intend to abide the law. You can't say that about criminals, who break it and do all they can to avoid detection.

In principle it is a fine idea but appears to be poorly visioned and organized.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked