• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

unhappy lawyer

tito887

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
146
Location
, ,
imported post

So I was leaving my wife's bank after depositing my financial aid check. There was a lawyer office next door and I figured I would walk in and ask some basic questions in the event I ever needed his services. Well I walk in and sit at his desk. I see his face and it is a look of disdain :uhoh:like I'm bothering him by asking him some basic questions. Then when I brought up that I carry a firearm for both self defense and a form of protest that's when he got really annoyed. He started telling me how the SC got it wrong and there is no individual right to bear arms, and that theres that little problem of, "a well regulated milita."

Keep in mind I didn't come in to debate. I just came in to ask about attorney representation. So I figured that he wasn't the right attorney. He thought the same thing so he advised me to go to another law firm. He sent me to the competitions office telling me to tell the other attorney that he sent me. So I left and met with the new attorney. When I told her about why I walked in she was a little skeptical that Open carry was legal. But after doing some cursory research, sherealized I was right. So now I at least know one attorney that I will probally never need. I guess the lesson is to make sure to meet with these attorneys and find out what their personal beliefs are so that you have someone that will actually defend you.

Oh by the way she wasn't the one that I was sent in to see. The guy I was sent to see was dealing with someone that was actually in legal trouble.
 

imperialism2024

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
3,047
Location
Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

It does bring up a good point of finding a pro-2A lawyer in the area in case you would ever require assistance in the legal field. It's easy to say, "I'm not talking without my lawyer present", but becomes difficult when you can't produce one.
 

FightingGlock19

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
583
Location
, Kentucky, USA
imported post

tito887 wrote:
Then when I brought up that I carry a firearm for both self defense and a form of protest that's when he got really annoyed.
I don't blame him for getting "really annoyed."

If any of your reasons for carrying a firearm includes, "a form of protest," you should REALLY reconsider. Such an ignorant reason that gives the rest a bad name.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

OC is not a statement... it's a personal neccessity long denied. Lawyer #1 was fulla sheit.
 

Flyer22

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
374
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
imported post

catass wrote:
tito887 wrote:
Then when I brought up that I carry a firearm for both self defense and a form of protest that's when he got really annoyed.
I don't blame him for getting "really annoyed."

If any of your reasons for carrying a firearm includes, "a form of protest," you should REALLY reconsider. Such an ignorant reason that gives the rest a bad name.

So non-verbal forms of protest are ignorant and bad? Or is itjust theprotest against anti-gun bias, that's all too common, that you object to? Regardless, if you think that a person should disarm just because they don't conform to the standards of a wannabe thought-police agent such as yourself, you are incredibly ignorant, bigoted, and intolerant.

I suggest that you move to China--I think you'll be a lot happier there.
 

FightingGlock19

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
583
Location
, Kentucky, USA
imported post

Flyer22 wrote:
catass wrote:
tito887 wrote:
Then when I brought up that I carry a firearm for both self defense and a form of protest that's when he got really annoyed.
I don't blame him for getting "really annoyed."

If any of your reasons for carrying a firearm includes, "a form of protest," you should REALLY reconsider. Such an ignorant reason that gives the rest a bad name.

So non-verbal forms of protest are ignorant and bad? Or is itjust theprotest against anti-gun bias, that's all too common, that you object to? Regardless, if you think that a person should disarm just because they don't conform to the standards of a wannabe thought-police agent such as yourself, you are incredibly ignorant, bigoted, and intolerant.

I suggest that you move to China--I think you'll be a lot happier there.

Maybe you're the one who should move to China. After all, you're for supressing my 1st Amendment rights. If you're not happy with China, maybe Iran will work for you.

That's why the open carry movement will never achieve what the concealed carry movement has. Too many people that open carry are just out looking for a "fight."

There may be good folks who open carry, however, the % of the ones using their guns as a tool to "protest" with will ruin it for all of us, both open and concealed carry citizens. It just gives the "anti's" more amunition.

You're not the first pro-open carry person I've seen with the wrong mindset. I'm sure you won't be the last.
 

rady8um

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2006
Messages
112
Location
Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

There may be good folks who open carry, however, the % of the ones using their guns as a tool to "protest" with will ruin it for all of us, both open and concealed carry citizens. It just gives the "anti's" more amunition.

You're not the first pro-open carry person I've seen with the wrong mindset. I'm sure you won't be the last.
I agree,I think all those A-holes who hold up signs in protest should knock it off, they could just screw things up for those of us with nothing to say.

God Damn them!! Don't screw up MY 1A rights withthe flagrant display of your 1A rights!!!
 

irfner

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
434
Location
SeaTac, Washington, USA
imported post

catass wrote:
tito887 wrote:
Then when I brought up that I carry a firearm for both self defense and a form of protest that's when he got really annoyed.
I don't blame him for getting "really annoyed."

If any of your reasons for carrying a firearm includes, "a form of protest," you should REALLY reconsider. Such an ignorant reason that gives the rest a bad name.
Catass are you the arbitrator of rights now? Carrying a firearm is a right. Who are you totell someonewhen or for what reason it is ok. tito887 if you open carry for self defense, fine. If you open carry just because you want to, fine. If you open carry because you feel you are making a statement ie: form of protest, fine. It is your right and I support you for having the b#lls to do so.

While we are at it who the hell does this attorney think he is that he knows more about the constitution than the judges on the U.S. Supreme Court? Others probably smarter than he made that argument and guess what? They were wrong. The U.S. Supreme Court said so.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

catass wrote:
Flyer22 wrote:
catass wrote:
tito887 wrote:
Then when I brought up that I carry a firearm for both self defense and a form of protest that's when he got really annoyed.
I don't blame him for getting "really annoyed."

If any of your reasons for carrying a firearm includes, "a form of protest," you should REALLY reconsider. Such an ignorant reason that gives the rest a bad name.

So non-verbal forms of protest are ignorant and bad?  Or is it just the protest against anti-gun bias, that's all too common, that you object to?  Regardless, if you think that a person should disarm just because they don't conform to the standards of a wannabe thought-police agent such as yourself, you are incredibly ignorant, bigoted, and intolerant.

I suggest that you move to China--I think you'll be a lot happier there.

Maybe you're the one who should move to China. After all, you're for supressing my 1st Amendment rights. If you're not happy with China, maybe Iran will work for you.

That's why the open carry movement will never achieve what the concealed carry movement has. Too many people that open carry are just out looking for a "fight."

There may be good folks who open carry, however, the % of the ones using their guns as a tool to "protest" with will ruin it for all of us, both open and concealed carry citizens. It just gives the "anti's" more amunition.

You're not the first pro-open carry person I've seen with the wrong mindset. I'm sure you won't be the last.

I smell troll.
 

Prophet

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2008
Messages
544
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

catass wrote:
tito887 wrote:
Then when I brought up that I carry a firearm for both self defense and a form of protest that's when he got really annoyed.
I don't blame him for getting "really annoyed."

If any of your reasons for carrying a firearm includes, "a form of protest," you should REALLY reconsider. Such an ignorant reason that gives the rest a bad name.

Catass is absolutely right. Being an OC'er as a form of protest is just starting trouble. It reminds me of all those troublemakers like Susan B Anthony, Frederick Douglass, Martin Luther King Jr., and a bunch of guys in Philadlphia back in 1776. How dare ANY of them protest anything. Susan B Anthony had the right to be married and not have to worry about politics, Frederick Douglass had the right to live as just a slave or just afreed slave, Martin Luther King Jr. had the right to live as a second hand citizen, Roas Parks had the right to sit at the back of the bus, the boys in Philadelphia had the right to live under the tyrannical rule of a foreign power across the ocean...HOW DARE THEY rock the boat and accomplish the 19th and 13thAmendments, Civil Rights Legislation and equality, and oh...I don't know...FOUND a NEW COUNTRY that with a declaration of independence followed later by a constitution that enumerates the god given rights that are inherent to all mankind.

Now Catass...if you cannot taste the sarcasm that is just dripping from my statements then perhaps you need to get your head out of the cats ass and wake up. There were people who had it good in all the aforementioned examples...but those who didn't or those who wanted it better had to protest. They did...they won. Could they have lost? Maybe...but only temporarily. If something is worth winning its worth fighting for...and moreso to keep fighting for.

You say that OC will lead to the downfall of carrying in general? I say that CC ONLY will lead to the downfall of carrying. If the mass society does not understand, in a actual, personal, eyes on way that regular law abiding citizens actually carry then they are more prone to be bamboozled and duped by Gun Grabbers into believing that only criminals have guns and as such guns need to be outlawed.

I'm a one man protest march against the anti-gun brady coalition gun grabbers of America and if someone wants to talk to me then i'll be more than happy to explain my reasons, my rights and the law. If someone wants to call the cops on me I'll explain the same thing to the cops and then when that same someone sees me again they will understand that OC is not against the law.

Catass, you remind me of a character in To Kill A Mockingbird, Mr. Dolphus Raymond. He was a white guy who was in love with a black woman...but because he didn't want to rock the boat he pretended to be drunk and kept a coke bottle in a brown paper back when he went out. CC-only folks always remind me of ole Dolphus.
 

David.Car

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
1,264
Location
Spokane, Washington, USA
imported post

tito887 wrote:
and that theres that little problem of, "a well regulated milita."
I don't see how that is a problem... Don't know where you are from, but most states have a definition of "militia" with in their legal codes.

For WA state:

"The militia of the state of Washington shall consist of all able bodied citizens of the United States and all other able bodied persons who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, residing within this state, who shall be more than eighteen years of age, and shall include all persons who are members of the national guard and the state guard, and said militia shall be divided into two classes, the organized militia and the unorganized militia."

So according to my state, every person over 18 who is a US citizen and lives in this state is part of the militia.
 

Prophet

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2008
Messages
544
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

David.Car wrote:
tito887 wrote:
and that theres that little problem of, "a well regulated milita."
I don't see how that is a problem... Don't know where you are from, but most states have a definition of "militia" with in their legal codes.

For WA state:

"The militia of the state of Washington shall consist of all able bodied citizens of the United States and all other able bodied persons who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, residing within this state, who shall be more than eighteen years of age, and shall include all persons who are members of the national guard and the state guard, and said militia shall be divided into two classes, the organized militia and the unorganized militia."

So according to my state, every person over 18 who is a US citizen and lives in this state is part of the militia.


The only problem I have with that is that it states that someone in a wheel chair can't have a firearm. But yeah...back in the day everyone who was able was in the militia...thats how the founders viewed it.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

Prophet wrote:
You say that OC will lead to the downfall of carrying in general? I say that CC ONLY will lead to the downfall of carrying. If the mass society does not understand, in a actual, personal, eyes on way that regular law abiding citizens actually carry then they are more prone to be bamboozled and duped by Gun Grabbers into believing that only criminals have guns and as such guns need to be outlawed.

I'm a one man protest march against the anti-gun brady coalition gun grabbers of America and if someone wants to talk to me then i'll be more than happy to explain my reasons, my rights and the law. If someone wants to call the cops on me I'll explain the same thing to the cops and then when that same someone sees me again they will understand that OC is not against the law.

+1 Rights are not something 'permitted'. Right's are a pre-existing human condition. Many people still confuse Rights withsomething 'permitted or granted' by Authority (Government). Not so. Those of us who attendedGummint schools seem to have been pretty much brain-washed into believing early on that the Constitution is something 'given'. Not so. The Constitution is Governments recognition of actual, pre-exititing Rights free people are born with. Permit and License and Registration are quite different animals. What 'Governments can do (and do) is DENY Rights... in violation fo the Constitution. We already know where that's been goin' on. I thought deprivation of civil rights was a felony? So... how come US Marshalls haven't swooped down on these State and local governments and arrested these tyrannical politicians and their appointed LEO lackeys?
 

DKSuddeth

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
833
Location
Bedford, Texas, USA
imported post

and yet again, some people who claim to be pro 2nd amendment can't stop throwing fellow gun carriers under the bus or cannibalizing them because something happens they can't F'ing agree upon. Thanks for nothing, morons. :banghead:
 

tito887

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
146
Location
, ,
imported post

I personally don't carry openly explicitly to make a statement. To me the site of a firearm on the hip is more of a deterrent then the possibility of a concealed weapon. But in this day and age with the anti-self defense attitude that permeates throughout our society I don't know how open carrying could not be construed as a political statement. I'm wearing my freedom on my hip. Until open carry becomes common it will continue be a political statement. But we can't get there by concealed our pistols. The public must see the peaceful, lawful carrying of firearms by everyday citizens to change public opinion.

Like one of the prior posts said, it's the idea that rights are given by the government and can be regulated. The idea that exercising your rights will lead to the right being taken away. A friend of mind had the same mindset when I informed him of his rights to, "remain silent, refuse consent to a search." That mindset is what must be defeated if we want to preserve what freedoms we have left. It's not about guns, it's about freedom. :idea:
 

thnycav

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
305
Location
Windsor VA, ,
imported post

Just read the Militia act of 1792. That is what the founding fathers defined as a militia.

Also you will see the the members of the Militia had to furnish their own firearm and ammunition.
 

DKSuddeth

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
833
Location
Bedford, Texas, USA
imported post

Sonora Rebel wrote:
You're welcome... I think :?
I can think of no post you have ever made that would include you in my 'thanks' category, sonora. You may include yourself in the category of 2nd amendment supporter. That is a good thing.
 
Top