imported post
You guys still don't get it. For all of your "vast intellect" (claimed by hawkflyer), you sure aren't firing on all cylinders. Let me elaborate as to why your, and other commentary, is flat out disgusting hypocrisy in action:
For USAF:
YES, you can run up to a group of black people and yell the N word. That is YOUR RIGHT, and a EXERCISING OF YOUR 1st Amendment! What you, and Barrack Obama can't seem to grasp is it is NOT illegal for you to do so! It is the RESPONSE YOU PROVOKE that is illegal! It's called "responsibility of action". Same goes with yelling "fire" in a movie theater. You may exercise your right to free speech however you want. Don't even try to say the action itself is illegal, because you would be WRONG. It is the response it provokes in both cases, that is illegal!
If you want to draw a parrallel, simply having a mouth without a muzzle on it, is quite like our right to keep and bear arms. Unlawful discharge, could be likened to yelling fire in a movie theater. Society will state you have consequences to pay, and in either case none of your rights were infringed upon.
Have any of you taken college courses, and if so, why are you incapable of using the "critical thinking" process?
A large portion of you can't even quantify your own argument. You are substantiating the argument of the antis, and if you can't see that,I recommend for all your self purported "wisdom" and "advanced reasoning skills", that you grab a cuppa joe, and literally sit and think about this.
You can sit here and argue what is "ok" or the "right thing to do" until you are blue in the face. This guy didn't do anything wrong yet, and regardless of his motives, you are condemning him for activities the majority of you do every other day.
Here. I have sent the following email to the Brady Foundation:
"To Whom It May Concern,
Recently, members of the Open Carry community, on a variety of forums, have begun a full out assault on an individual who opted to practice what they have claimed on a number of threads, is a simple exercise of our rightsas granted via the 2nd Amendment of the US Consitution.
The purpose for this assault on this individuals character, who was actually operating full-well within his rights, is based on several factors, which may interest you.
It is my understanding that many of your colleagues have a desire to remove what they classify as "assault weapons", and have asserted that these weapons are indeed "dangerous" for public possession, and therefore should not be granted any kind of immunity via the 2nd Amendment.
The debates that have occured between you, and the Pro-Gun community, regarding these weapons, have included lots of commentary from the "Pro Gun" proponents wherein they describe the weapons as "Normal", or "Just as able to inflict damage as a normal handgun".
What you see from the "Pro Open Carry" community, is interesting though. When this man who walked through Radnor Park with an AK47 Pistol was detained, he was ultimately released because he was found to be violating no laws. However, let's take a look at commentary from some of the most staunch supporters of Open Carry rights, and the 2nd Amendment:
Mike Stollenwerk (Co-Founder of OpenCarry.org):
**“Many people in the open carry community are not very happy with this fellow's apparent stunt to carry a ‘handgun’ that looked like a long gun slung over his shoulder, and capped with an orange tip to make it disguised as a toy — no wonder the police took an interest and investigated the guy. Had they seen a person wearing a normal handgun in a proper holster on a walk, they probably would have just said ‘hello.’”**
The following was clipped directly from opencarry.org:
**John Pierce is a co-founder of OpenCarry.org, a group that seeks to normalize the open carry of "properly holstered handguns" as people go about their lives.
"On a fundamental level, I don't think he did anything wrong," Pierce said of Embody, "but politically that might not be best thing to do and it's not something we're advocating for."
Pierce said wearing camouflage also perpetuates an unhelpful stereotype.
Pierce said he lived in Bristol, Va., for years, right on Tennessee border. He said he has openly carried a holstered, normal-sized handgun in Tennessee numerous times and never had anyone complain about it.**
What is interesting to note, is this:
Apparently, even in the firearms community, amongst individuals who are very adept with firearms and ballistics, the AK47 is cause for alarm, as clearly indicated above.
Apparently, wearing and using camouflage, even in the firearms community, in conjunction with firearms, is cause for alarm.
Apparently, and most interestingly , firearms proponents for open carry, are lobbying only for "Holstered, normal-sized handguns".
Previously, it was believed that these individuals would fight for the "rights" of people to carry any firearm they wished, so long as it complied with local, state, and federal law. This is apparently NOT the case, as you can plainly see now, with a quick perusing of the majority of open carry or firearms forums.
A large portion of those there, who professed to be supporters of open carry, are stating that carying an AK47 pistol in a rural state park, is not a wise (or normal?) thing to do, irregardless of its legality.
Respectfully,
My Name Here"
Keep up the hypocrisy, hypocrites! I will update the anti-gun proponents and eliminate the legwork for them!
"Right thing to do". WOW, some of you are seriously devoid of any critical thinking skills.
Cheers!