imported post
Sonora Rebel wrote:
In my opinion you're a nutcase.
I think you may be over stating this to some degree. I have come to recognize that you tend toward direct answers and the shortest reasonable path to a conclusion. Both admirable traits I recognize and agree with.
Clearly one of the defining elements of mental illness is repeating the same action over and over expecting a different outcome each time. In this case he is repeating the same action over and over and achieving exactly the result he desires. That result is getting a rise out of people on this forum. So at least in this case, I am not certain that "nutcase" is the applicable term.
In this case we have a person who needs attention from any source and in whatever way he can get it. He gets it by posting on firearms related forums where he hopes he will get a rise out of the "locals". He also wants to push the limits of current societal norms by selecting unusual firearms that will draw attention when carried in public. Thjis of course focuses public attention on him, so again the exact result he desires. He has stated repeatedly that he is not a firearms activist, and expanding the rights of people to carry is not part of his purpose.
He and his supporters seem to want everyone to overlook the fact that this and other firearms forums are places where people gather to discuss ideas both good and bad, and also to express their opinions on various aspects of firearms ownership and use. So when someone asks a question as was the case with this thread, people are SUPPOSED to chime in with supportive and opposing opinions. The fact that some here may disagree with the possible answers to the original question iss the actual purpose of it being posted in the first place.
While this guys supporters refuse to admit this, I have not seen one single poster who has said that this guy does not have a right to do all the things he is doing. I have seen a lot of people who have agreed that a lot of those things were bad ideas. There is a distinction with an important difference her that he and a lot of his supports do not seem to be able to understand. It is quite simple really and it is critical to understanding the arguments surrounding him and what he is doing.
People can support 100% a persons RIGHT to do a thing while at the same time refusing to support actually doing that thing. It does not make them anti anything, it make them THINKING people. It is not lost on many of us here that the most vociferous, and vicious of this mans supporters are not able to grasp this simple concept. For these people there is no difference between recognizing a right, and requirements for responsibility in the exercise of rights. People have a right to run across a busy rural road, and we all recognize that. How many think darting across in front of an oncoming car or truck is a good idea or that it should not be discouraged. How many have reached out to stop a person in this situation to keep them safe. There is no difference in this situation. He has repeatedly said he is afraid the police will shoot him. Many have offered a number of ideas on how to avoid that.
What we have here is a person who repeatedly posts on many forums new questions all centered on carrying rifles redesigned to fit an arcane legal description of a handgun in his area of the country. Most people who see these "handguns" will assume that they are modified or sawed off rifles, and that is precisely the point he is depending on in selecting them for open carry. It does not matter what they are considered to be under the legal definition, to the person on the street they appear to be sawed off rifles. His problem is not with the LEOs in his area, his problem is that the LEOs MUST react to calls from citizens to a man they believe is or is about to commit a crime. Maybe it should not be that way but it is and he counts on this for his attention grabbing. By doing this he will get the notariety he craves.
He will have a few supporters that will come along very soon to excoriate me and others that they PERCEIVE to be in opposition to what he is doing. It should be noted however that not one of these people has the guts to go buy one of these modified rifle designs and carry it openly in support of this persons action. No, all they have time and courage for is to call people names from behind the shelter and safety of the internet. They want this guy to do what they lack the courage to do themselves.
So here is my take on all of this. We all have a right to buy and carry what we want subject to some legal restrictions. If it is your purpose to simply exercise that right, why post anything anywhere? A person who believes they have a right to do something does not waste time posting on the internet looking for affirmation. Man up and just go do it.
Unless you are a complete blockhead (the jury is still out) you already knew what the answer to this poll would be before you asked the question. That is why you left off what would be the most used option in your poll. What option you say? You asked all of us which of these two "handgun" wannabees would be best for open carry, but you did not include NEITHER as an option. That is certainly a reasonable answer to your question, and you left it out only because you know that is the answer people would have selected if it had been offered.
Sonora Rebel - We both know this is a self correcting situation. My only regrets are that someone is going to have to fill out a lot of paperwork, and it will take some time for the firearms right movement to recover. Bug on a windshield brother ... Bug on a windshield.
