guitrman1001
Regular Member
imported post
One word
Just one word on the "open carry" issue: Testosterone.
Lori Conatser
Redlands
*****************************************************
Save money
Kennesaw, Ga., encourages concealed carry. Their crime statistics for December 2009 are:
Murder: 0
Rape: 1
Robbery: 2
Aggravated assault: 1
Burglary: 10
Larceny: 47
Auto theft: 2
Arson: 0
Total: 63 +13 from previous month.
Year to date: 641 +54 from last year
Redlands could save a lot of money.
Joseph G.N. Iorio
Redlands
*****************************************************
Deterrent to criminals
I understand the concern that citizens may feel when they see men (or women) whom they do not know openly carrying firearms. But the fact is that we are actually safer when law-abiding citizens are known to be armed.
The presence of upright, armed citizens is a deterrent to criminals.
If you were a criminal, would you rather break into a home where you know the citizens are unarmed or one where you might meet armed resistance? There is nothing criminals love better than a "gun-free" zone or city.
In a free country, citizens take seriously their responsibilities to protect and care for their families and communities. In a "nanny state," subjects depend on their government for education, jobs and security.
Greg Schneider
Redlands
*****************************************************
Do the research
Responsible gun owners should absolutely have the right to carry a firearm open or concealed, as they see fit. If you do your research, you will discover that the legal gun-owning population is comprised of the most responsible and patriotic folks around.
Furthermore, if you make guns illegal, only outlaws will own guns. Is that what you want?
Any laws that prohibit or discourage legal gun ownership will only serve to drive away good citizens from an already struggling California.
I suggest you read what our founding fathers had to say about this topic.
Bruce Williams
Redlands resident for 40 years
*****************************************************
No longer necessary
A little reading about the Second Amendment and its written antecedents clearly shows that carrying arms in the days before organized police, recognized law enforcement agencies and the National Guard was a right and a responsibility. It is not necessary these days.
The "open carry" enthusiasts with the impotence of their unloaded guns and their display in public settings, places of business and political gatherings only increase the demand and vigilance of our law enforcement people who are diverted from actually stopping crime before it happens.
When a national figure - hypothetically "one heartbeat away from the presidency" - draws crosshairs around the pictures of politicians who have voted against her ideologies I suppose this encourages the haters and the fearmongerers.
If the gun toters have any other skills than creating fear among women and children by holding their cold steel for all to see - guns are designed to kill - they should pick up a hammer and work for Habitat For Humanity, Social Services or coach kids.
Tom Medlicott
Redlands
*****************************************************
Different times
I couldn't believe my eyes when I read the article showing our RPD checking a citizen openly carrying a gun. I thought, "What!"
I can't quite wrap my mind around the purpose of this protest. I call it a protest, because I assume they are just demonstrating their Second Amendment right to bear arms.
When people use that amendment to have and carry guns, it really bothers me, because they need to understand the way our country was at the time and now it is 2010.
They need to better understand their history and understand why the private citizens needed to arm themselves: There were no organized military or police to protect them.
Now let me ask you this: Is having our Police Department busy checking whether guns are loaded or not a good use of our Police Department? Also, for every weapon that is openly carried that is unloaded, how many are loaded?
Mary Downey
Redlands
*****************************************************
A form of profiling
I understand the concept of "open carry" but do not understand why the Police Department wishes to stop individuals to inspect their weapons. Isn't this a form of profiling?
It has been observed by the general public that the individuals that are guilty of criminal activities with loaded, unregistered and/or illegally acquired guns have them hidden under or in their clothing.
However, this criminal element is not stopped because the Police Department does not want a possible lawsuit for profiling these individuals, thus, becoming a double standard.
I think "open carry" is perfectly fine. Instead of an empty weapon, let's put ammunition in them and allow law-abiding citizens to protect themselves against the lawless.
Brenda Tate
Mentone
One word
Just one word on the "open carry" issue: Testosterone.
Lori Conatser
Redlands
*****************************************************
Save money
Kennesaw, Ga., encourages concealed carry. Their crime statistics for December 2009 are:
Murder: 0
Rape: 1
Robbery: 2
Aggravated assault: 1
Burglary: 10
Larceny: 47
Auto theft: 2
Arson: 0
Total: 63 +13 from previous month.
Year to date: 641 +54 from last year
Redlands could save a lot of money.
Joseph G.N. Iorio
Redlands
*****************************************************
Deterrent to criminals
I understand the concern that citizens may feel when they see men (or women) whom they do not know openly carrying firearms. But the fact is that we are actually safer when law-abiding citizens are known to be armed.
The presence of upright, armed citizens is a deterrent to criminals.
If you were a criminal, would you rather break into a home where you know the citizens are unarmed or one where you might meet armed resistance? There is nothing criminals love better than a "gun-free" zone or city.
In a free country, citizens take seriously their responsibilities to protect and care for their families and communities. In a "nanny state," subjects depend on their government for education, jobs and security.
Greg Schneider
Redlands
*****************************************************
Do the research
Responsible gun owners should absolutely have the right to carry a firearm open or concealed, as they see fit. If you do your research, you will discover that the legal gun-owning population is comprised of the most responsible and patriotic folks around.
Furthermore, if you make guns illegal, only outlaws will own guns. Is that what you want?
Any laws that prohibit or discourage legal gun ownership will only serve to drive away good citizens from an already struggling California.
I suggest you read what our founding fathers had to say about this topic.
Bruce Williams
Redlands resident for 40 years
*****************************************************
No longer necessary
A little reading about the Second Amendment and its written antecedents clearly shows that carrying arms in the days before organized police, recognized law enforcement agencies and the National Guard was a right and a responsibility. It is not necessary these days.
The "open carry" enthusiasts with the impotence of their unloaded guns and their display in public settings, places of business and political gatherings only increase the demand and vigilance of our law enforcement people who are diverted from actually stopping crime before it happens.
When a national figure - hypothetically "one heartbeat away from the presidency" - draws crosshairs around the pictures of politicians who have voted against her ideologies I suppose this encourages the haters and the fearmongerers.
If the gun toters have any other skills than creating fear among women and children by holding their cold steel for all to see - guns are designed to kill - they should pick up a hammer and work for Habitat For Humanity, Social Services or coach kids.
Tom Medlicott
Redlands
*****************************************************
Different times
I couldn't believe my eyes when I read the article showing our RPD checking a citizen openly carrying a gun. I thought, "What!"
I can't quite wrap my mind around the purpose of this protest. I call it a protest, because I assume they are just demonstrating their Second Amendment right to bear arms.
When people use that amendment to have and carry guns, it really bothers me, because they need to understand the way our country was at the time and now it is 2010.
They need to better understand their history and understand why the private citizens needed to arm themselves: There were no organized military or police to protect them.
Now let me ask you this: Is having our Police Department busy checking whether guns are loaded or not a good use of our Police Department? Also, for every weapon that is openly carried that is unloaded, how many are loaded?
Mary Downey
Redlands
*****************************************************
A form of profiling
I understand the concept of "open carry" but do not understand why the Police Department wishes to stop individuals to inspect their weapons. Isn't this a form of profiling?
It has been observed by the general public that the individuals that are guilty of criminal activities with loaded, unregistered and/or illegally acquired guns have them hidden under or in their clothing.
However, this criminal element is not stopped because the Police Department does not want a possible lawsuit for profiling these individuals, thus, becoming a double standard.
I think "open carry" is perfectly fine. Instead of an empty weapon, let's put ammunition in them and allow law-abiding citizens to protect themselves against the lawless.
Brenda Tate
Mentone
