Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 62

Thread: "We needed licensed OC because.."

  1. #1
    Lone Star Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    ...I don't want some yahoo without training being able to OC a firearm"


    Now, is the poster's concern that he will be shot by the yahoo or that the yahoo will do stupid things with his gun in general?

    Edit: sorry for the title typo.

    I'm up late reading posts again...

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Burlington, ,
    Posts
    39

    Post imported post

    Shorts wrote:
    ...I don't want some yahoo without training being able to OC a firearm"


    Now, is the poster's concern that he will be shot by the yahoo or that the yahoo will do stupid things with his gun in general?

    Edit: sorry for the title typo.

    I'm up late reading posts again...
    whenever I see posts like this I always think "why aren't there more incidents of ND in VT" Now there isn't a whole lot of OC in Vermont because you don't need a permit to CC, but with it so easy to carry a gun in Vermont (no permit, no class, no proof of competency needed) we haven't seen arguments over parking spaces turn into shoot outs. Vermont has proven that letting any citizen carry a gun doesn't result in "wild west" shoot outs.

  3. #3
    Regular Member streetdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Unionville, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    342

    Post imported post

    What part of the Second Amendment "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" don't you understand? We were originally required to have arms ready for self defense and defense of the country. Read Stephen P. Halbrook's Book "The Founder's Second Amendment Origins of the Right to Bear Arms" to gain an understanding of our responsibilities as citizens. We should not be having this fight to get our rights back or the restrictions on them, but somebody was willing to give them up. I want them back!

    The fact that Texans are having this fight to be able to OC means the Texas has already taken this right away. Now, what are you going to do to get them back?
    'Till the last landings made, and we stand unafraid, on a shore not mortal has seen,
    'Till the last bugle call, sounds taps for us all,
    It's Semper Fidelis, MARINE!

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Austin, Texas, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    Shorts wrote:
    ...I don't want some yahoo without training being able to OC a firearm"


    Now, is the poster's concern that he will be shot by the yahoo or that the yahoo will do stupid things with his gun in general?
    I think the original poster of this statement wouldn't open carry without training, and since he doesn't know if a person he sees OC'ing has been trained in it's use like he is, gives him matter for concern. Now if that same person was CC'ing and he never saw the gun then he has no worry even though a gun is still present. He has no control over that other person so he doesn't want him to exercise his right, unless that person has had the same level of training that he has. People like this are self absorbed, unlessyou have a license or wear a uniform then you are untrainined and can't handle a weapon. It is only self-reflection.

    streetdoc wrote:
    ...The fact that Texans are having this fight to be able to OC means the Texas has already taken this right away. Now, what are you going to do to get them back?
    As you know we are working on it fast and furious. The antis' set the clock in motion and we are going to stop the pendulum.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    RTM Rockford, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    316

    Post imported post

    Shorts wrote:
    ...I don't want some yahoo without training being able to OC a firearm"


    Now, is the poster's concern that he will be shot by the yahoo or that the yahoo will do stupid things with his gun in general?

    Edit: sorry for the title typo.

    I'm up late reading posts again...
    I cannot say what would motivate a person to make such a statement even though I understand some of the concerns people have regarding OC. I think the best approach with such a person would be to ask them what their primary concerns are.

    I would then ask if they could cite any evidence of widespread difficulties in this regard in areas where unlicensed OC already exists. At that point, I would move into the issues of civil rights being unlicenseable,2A civil rights reflecting natural rights of self defense, etc.

  6. #6
    Regular Member streetdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Unionville, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    342

    Post imported post

    GumiBear wrote:
    streetdoc wrote:
    ...The fact that Texans are having this fight to be able to OC means the Texas has already taken this right away. Now, what are you going to do to get them back?
    As you know we are working on it fast and furious. The antis' set the clock in motion and we are going to stop the pendulum.
    Sorry, I meant that for "Shorts", not to be disrespectful but to push the idea to fight for your rights. I know that Texans are working hard to get their rights back and I really hope that you get them and we then move on to the next state.
    'Till the last landings made, and we stand unafraid, on a shore not mortal has seen,
    'Till the last bugle call, sounds taps for us all,
    It's Semper Fidelis, MARINE!

  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    ...I don't want some yahoo without training being able to OC a firearm"
    I'd venture to guess that this person feels that they are not competent with a firearm, and therefore assumes that the "average" person is not. They don't trust themselves with a firearm.

    "What's to stop someone from shooting each other over a parking spot if everyone has guns?"
    I'd assume this person has their own anger problems, and believes that they themselves might become violent over a petty argument if the tools were available. Because they feel this way, they assume that the "average" person does, too. They don't trust themselves with a firearm.

    "Having a gun around children is just asking for trouble. Accidents do happen, you know!"
    I'd bet this person is irresponsible, and tends to mislabel their negligence as "accidents". They're probably not responsible parents, either. They think the best way to protect their children is to remove anything that may hurt them, instead of educating them and raising them properly. They also assume that the "average" person is just like them. They don't trust themselves, or their children, with firearms.



    It's become more and more obvious to me that almost any anti-gun argument can be brought back to a lack of safety, responsibility, and self-control on the part of the anti. They don't trust themselves, and so they don't trust anyone else. That sounds like a scary world to live in.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    RTM Rockford, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    316

    Post imported post

    As DreQospells it out, this would be another case of "projection" run amuck. I'd have to agree with this.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    Shorts wrote:
    ...I don't want some yahoo without training being able to OC a firearm"


    Now, is the poster's concern that he will be shot by the yahoo or that the yahoo will do stupid things with his gun in general?

    Edit: sorry for the title typo.

    I'm up late reading posts again...
    I understand you are probablydoing some kind of research, but have you considered using the search function for the forum. So far every one of the discussions you have started has been covered over and over. AFAICT the only thing you are dong differently is making your thread titles intentionally provocative.

    Regards
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    "We need licensed OC because....

    ...I am totally ignorant about Alaska and Vermont."



    Edit: Hawk does make a good point. What he doesn't realize is that Shorts is just waiting to elicit concise, indisputable rebuttals from myself that enable him to shut his opponents elsewhere on the internet up once and for all. :P

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Centennial, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,412

    Post imported post

    Hcidem wrote:
    As DreQospells it out, this would be another case of "projection" run amuck. I'd have to agree with this.
    Speaking of projection, have you read "Raging Against Self Defense"? The author discusses the psycology behind anti-gun views, including projection.

  12. #12
    Lone Star Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    hawkflyer, marchaul - I'm just reading other forums and posting the concern here for an explanation There's no ill will or setup going on

    Using the search would probably be better since it looks as if these types of questions have all been covered and they're tired of being asked.

    Thanks yall - sorry to disturb

  13. #13
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    FogRider wrote:
    Hcidem wrote:
    As DreQospells it out, this would be another case of "projection" run amuck. I'd have to agree with this.
    Speaking of projection, have you read "Raging Against Self Defense"? The author discusses the psycology behind anti-gun views, including projection.
    Well I'm glad I'm not the only one that has come to that conclusion.

    I recently had a..umm..discussion with someone you might consider an anti. I was accused of being paranoid because I carried a gun everywhere. I replied with "I don't carry because I'm afraid. I am not afraid, because I carry." That didn't settle well with them, and they continued to spout off. They posed the question of "So whats going to happen when someone dings your car door in the parking lot? Are you going to get pissed off and shoot them??!". I quickly and sternly said absolutely not.

    I then asked them "Have you ever killed someone, orat least tried to kill someone, over a petty argument...or any argument for that matter?" They laughed and said of course not. I then asked "Well, now lets say, for one day, you had a loaded gun in your possession. Do you think you would then kill or hurt someone over a petty argument, since you had the tool available?". Here's the best part...they THOUGHT ABOUT IT! They then said "well, that's not the point". I said well just answer the question, to which they responded "well I don't know!!".

    So this person can't honestly and definitively say that they wouldn't try to kill someone just because they had a gun in their possession......and they wonder why I carry a gun. :?

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Shorts wrote:
    hawkflyer, marchaul - I'm just reading other forums and posting the concern here for an explanation * There's no ill will or setup going on
    I never thought there was.

    If you re-read my post you'll see that I was merely being facetious to Hawkflyer, tooting my own horn as it were.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    38

    Post imported post

    It is difficult to explain to people sometimes that the ability to handle a gun safely is not some ancient mystery!

    People have this crazy notion that training is the end all solution to a non-existent problem. Only with training can people understand that guns are dangerous and how to prevent accidents. They don't know that some of the most highly trained people still have accidents.

    In California you can possibly explain that every new handgun purchase and PPT must accompany a "safe handling demonstration" as well as demonstrate they know how to safely handle it. Is that enough training? Or does someone need to be trained to the same level as an LEO? Spec-Op team?

  16. #16
    Lone Star Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    Shorts wrote:
    hawkflyer, marchaul - I'm just reading other forums and posting the concern here for an explanation There's no ill will or setup going on
    I never thought there was.

    If you re-read my post you'll see that I was merely being facetious to Hawkflyer, tooting my own horn as it were.
    :P Duh! Sorry! I started the typing-before-caffeine and I completely missed it!

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    "We need licensed OC because....

    ...I am totally ignorant about Alaska and Vermont."



    Edit: Hawk does make a good point. What he doesn't realize is that Shorts is just waiting to elicit concise, indisputable rebuttals from myself that enable him to shut his opponents elsewhere on the internet up once and for all. :P
    Well just so nobody gets to thinking one opinion is any better than another.

    Shorts - I did not intent to curb your enthusiasm, I was just wondering if you had tried to look this stuff up.

    Most of us here have to deal with these question you are asking regularly. In many cases they have really been discussed to death. So I know I am not the only one that feels a little jerked around by the provocative titling you are using for these threads. Then I get here and, "Oh it is Shorts again", and I can calm down.

    If this is all helping you somehow then fine carry on. But if this is about consolidating the arguments, there are threads all over the forum already.

    Regards

    PS - Of Course if you are soliciting the wisdom of Marshaul, well that would also be "a horse of a differant color."
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    Of Course if you are soliciting the wisdom of Marshaul, well that would also be "a horse of a differant color."
    Well, at least you understand even if you can't spell "different"! :P


  19. #19
    Lone Star Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    streetdoc wrote:
    What part of the Second Amendment "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" don't you understand? We were originally required to have arms ready for self defense and defense of the country. Read Stephen P. Halbrook's Book "The Founder's Second Amendment Origins of the Right to Bear Arms" to gain an understanding of our responsibilities as citizens. We should not be having this fight to get our rights back or the restrictions on them, but somebody was willing to give them up. I want them back!

    The fact that Texans are having this fight to be able to OC means the Texas has already taken this right away. Now, what are you going to do to get them back?
    Street doc, I'm doing my best as I a military wife and holster maker who currently living in Japan, to support the opencarry.org movement to push for Texas open carry. I've given money, I've contacted my state Rep and my State senator and my Gov., both by mail and over the phone, I've spread the word on other forums and I am ultimately trying to mentally prepare myself for challenges ahead.

    Now, is that enough? Probably not, there's still a lot of work I can do and I hope to continue it once back on Texas soil. Until then, I am left to brain storm and study and learn as best I can so I can be prepared.

    So do I pass the test to ask questions?

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Shorts wrote:
    ...I don't want some yahoo without training being able to OC a firearm"


    Now, is the poster's concern that he will be shot by the yahoo or that the yahoo will do stupid things with his gun in general?

    Edit: sorry for the title typo.

    I'm up late reading posts again...
    I think the poster would feel much better if he got shot by a trained, licensed person, then by a yahoo. Right?

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    Shorts wrote:
    ...SNIP
    Street doc, I'm doing my best as I a military wife and holster maker who currently living in Japan, to support the opencarry.org movement to push for Texas open carry. ...SNIP...
    So do I pass the test to ask questions?
    For my part all you need to say was that you were serving this country overseas. Thank you and your husband for your service, and feel free to ask what you will in any way you want to ask it.

    With my sincere apologies
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  22. #22
    Lone Star Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    marshaul wrote:
    "We need licensed OC because....

    ...I am totally ignorant about Alaska and Vermont."



    Edit: Hawk does make a good point. What he doesn't realize is that Shorts is just waiting to elicit concise, indisputable rebuttals from myself that enable him to shut his opponents elsewhere on the internet up once and for all. :P
    Well just so nobody gets to thinking one opinion is any better than another.

    Shorts - I did not intent to curb your enthusiasm, I was just wondering if you had tried to look this stuff up.

    Most of us here have to deal with these question you are asking regularly. In many cases they have really been discussed to death. So I know I am not the only one that feels a little jerked around by the provocative titling you are using for these threads. Then I get here and, "Oh it is Shorts again", and I can calm down.

    If this is all helping you somehow then fine carry on. But if this is about consolidating the arguments, there are threads all over the forum already.

    Regards

    PS - Of Course if you are soliciting the wisdom of Marshaul, well that would also be "a horse of a differant color."
    Hawkflyer, I'm going to sell myself out and say its much easier to ask the question than it is to search The topics are covered. I've searched often for other questions. What I find challenging is that many threads go in different directions and there are a lot of posts to sift through to find what I need. The other part is that the stacks of posts often compliment each other. So that particular idea is built up through a series of posts, which makes for a lot of reading.

    Again, I appreciate folks willingness here to entertain my questions. I do p ost the title provocative. I use the wording that an antigun or antiOCers might use. I find that the familiarity to be understandable on a cognitive level. I certainly don't mean to raise thte ol' blood pressure too much!

  23. #23
    Lone Star Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    For my part all you need to say was that you were serving this country overseas. Thank you and your husband for your service, and feel free to ask what you will in any way you want to ask it. With my sincere apologies
    Oh shoot, my intention was to keep 'Shorts' gender neutral. The cat's out of the bag now :P


    No apology needed, but thank you for the thank you.



    Alright, so the topic at hand.

    I think the poster would feel much better if he got shot by a trained, licensed person, then by a yahoo. Right?
    LOL I'll be sure to ask. Come to think of it, I have a particular post in mind that I'll post to in a bit. I'm sure this guy would actually get a kick out of the reply



    This kind of argument is one based on projection? Interesting.




    I know we've all heard stories, read stories and/or experienced "that guy" at the range who is a bit scary to share a divider with. I would venture to say that if "that guy" is bad at handling, it's a very good thing he will not be handling his gun while out in public as it should be/will securely holstered or 1) he is committing a punishable offense and 2) something's gone wrong and the situation is a condition red where he's drawing.


    Is this reasonable thinking?



  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Can you please rephrase and reask?

  25. #25
    Lone Star Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    Can you please rephrase and reask?
    Ok, my take is that a gun being carried, either OC or CC, still must be carried appropriately in public. Which means, no hands on the gun. No playing with it. And certainly no drawing unless that is where the situation has gone for self defense.

    In general, the behavior required from a person carrying a firearm should be the same whether the gun is concealed or open.

    Thoughts?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •