Be nice to officers during encounters, they go through quite a bit. [Poplawski trial]

Badger Johnson said:

I ask again, please (being respectful) post links or cites of OC-ers acting inappropriately and/or posting their inappropriate actions on forums. I don't me those people who have websites who challenge the police, I assume you mean one of the rank and file.

Failing to do so, I think you need to post a retraction and an apology.

Thanks and have a good day.

Click to expand...

Are you really of the mindset that if a person cannot post you a link to some half assed news article that anything they say is false? Go on youtube.... I understand you would rather be directly linked there to cut out all the extra work but trust me, go to youtube and look up "open carry stop" etc etc etc and you will see plenty of people acting like complete idiots after being stopped, you will also see plenty of cops being idiots.

Some guys here get SO into carrying a gun that it stops being about protection and starts being about attention. They make carrying a firearm openly into some big-boy hobby and that seems to be when things go downhill.

You can find examples of people being innapropriate on this very forum, go look up any random OC encounter post and look for all the people exclaiming how they are about to go out to a place they know they arent welcome just to "test the waters"...

Ive even seen people say things such as "Oh they kicked you out for OCing? cool ill go by later and test the waters.... ill bring my kids i just taught my 9 year old how to use the video camera "

And that is truly disturbing.

Deanimator said:

Violate my rights under color of law as an LEO and I will "nicely" do everything humanly possible within the law to destroy your career and finances.

Be ready to tell your kids that there won't be any Christmas (or college) because most of your paycheck is going to the "nice" man whose rights you violated in order to look like a "big man" to your friends.

Click to expand...

^^^^ again, another good example of a really ****** mindset thats been going around lately. The "You wasted 5 minutes of my time now prepare to be sued for my trouble" attitude that people seem to love to employ. I wonder how many people here are going to strap on a recorder and go TRY to get stopped today just so they can pull this attitude...

Hronisiver said:

Are you really of the mindset that if a person cannot post you a link to some half assed news article that anything they say is false? Go on youtube.... I understand you would rather be directly linked there to cut out all the extra work but trust me, go to youtube and look up "open carry stop" etc etc etc and you will see plenty of people acting like complete idiots after being stopped, you will also see plenty of cops being idiots.

Click to expand...

It isnt up to the responder to prove the claims of another, no more than it is up to you to cite cases referenced by someone else to support their position. It is up to the person making the allegation or claim to support that claim when challenged.

Hronsiver said:

Some guys here get SO into carrying a gun that it stops being about protection and starts being about attention. They make carrying a firearm openly into some big-boy hobby and that seems to be when things go downhill.

You can find examples of people being innapropriate on this very forum, go look up any random OC encounter post and look for all the people exclaiming how they are about to go out to a place they know they arent welcome just to "test the waters"...

Click to expand...

If you have some instances to cite, post a link......

Hronsiver said:

Ive even seen people say things such as "Oh they kicked you out for OCing? cool ill go by later and test the waters.... ill bring my kids i just taught my 9 year old how to use the video camera "

And that is truly disturbing.

Click to expand...

What is 'disturbing' about this, in your opinion?

Hronisiver said:

^^^^ again, another good example of a really ****** mindset thats been going around lately. The "You wasted 5 minutes of my time now prepare to be sued for my trouble" attitude that people seem to love to employ. I wonder how many people here are going to strap on a recorder and go TRY to get stopped today just so they can pull this attitude...

Click to expand...

No, that is not accurate. It is a mindset that is more in keeping with "change the status quo."

Some LE seem to believe they have powers that are not actual. It is entirely proper to challenge this when encountered. Why do you not agree with this? What is it about citizens standing up for their Rights that has you all in a tizzy?



I see you are fairly new to these forums. How do you feel about some of the other Rights beyond the 2nd? How are you about the 4th and 5th amendments? Do you support those Rights?

eye95 said:

I am an OCer, and I am beginning to see many (not all, not most, not even a large minority, but many) OCers as "crazy" (not in a medical or legal sense). Some of the postings here are contributing to that image.

Click to expand...

I see the same thing in most of my daily life. There is a growing disconnect for many people between actual reality and their percieved thought life.

I think it's a byproduct of the virtual lives many lead on the internet, in social media and while gaming. Other people become percieved as artifical constructs and thus lose their humanity in the eyes of these disconnected folks.

So the disconnected say and write things they would never say in person. That's why I don't do much online. Reality is precious.

wrightme said:

It isnt up to the responder to prove the claims of another, no more than it is up to you to cite cases referenced by someone else to support their position. It is up to the person making the allegation or claim to support that claim when challenged.


Ok. Can you please cite or offer a link to why what you just said is correct? You made a claim and now you are required to support that claim in response to my challenge. So if, at this point, you cannot produce any cite regarding when its appropriate or required to produce a link, does that mean that you havent supported your claim and are incorrect? Which would make me correct and, by default, erase your status of being incorrect because by being proven incorrect you were actually admonished of said incorrectness?

We have now entered the twilight zone.

If you have some instances to cite, post a link......

What is 'disturbing' about this, in your opinion?

Click to expand...

A man is strapping a firearm onto his hip and bringing his family to a location where he knows he is not welcome, in an attempt to stir the pot and get attention. Are you in disagreement that people who have OCed have been shot and killed or or do you require cites for that as well?

http://snardfarker.ning.com/forum/topics/man-killed-by-police-in-costco

A very sad case of people on both ends not acting intelligently that ended with this mans death. His girlfriend was right beside him the entire time and was also at risk of being shot.

Now take that type of situation and add to the fact that some people go out of their way to find places that are anti-gun AND they bring their family along for "moral support" and youve just got a bad situation on your hands.

Out children should be educated about the world not put smack dab in the middle of their parents opinions and politics.

Do you really want to read about some little girl being shot because she pulled a video camera out of her pocket to record her daddy being stopped by the police.

I think a lot of people probably immediately want to argue that its not the dads or daughters fault and the cop pulled the trigger etc etc.... Me, id rather the hypothetical little girl still be alive instead of us getting another hypothetical scapegoat to argue about.

Hronisiver said:

A man is strapping a firearm onto his hip and bringing his family to a location where he knows he is not welcome, in an attempt to stir the pot and get attention. Are you in disagreement that people who have OCed have been shot and killed or or do you require cites for that as well?

Click to expand...

Oh, so it is someone exercising a Right in an area where others don't like it that gets you all in a tizzy?

Hronisiver said:

http://snardfarker.ning.com/forum/topics/man-killed-by-police-in-costco

A very sad case of people on both ends not acting intelligently that ended with this mans death. His girlfriend was right beside him the entire time and was also at risk of being shot.

Click to expand...

I live in NV. That person was not what you seem to want to have him be an example of, was he?
Frankly, it is a very sad case of overbearing LE activity where is was not necessary. In addition, poor choice of how to respond by the victim in this instance. WHAT did he do wrong, in your eyes?

Hronisiver said:

Now take that type of situation and add to the fact that some people go out of their way to find places that are anti-gun AND they bring their family along for "moral support" and youve just got a bad situation on your hands.

Click to expand...

The reaction of others is not the creation of ours. Frankly, for me, OC with the family is more about the reason to OC than about "moral support." But, the reality is that a single person carrying is NOT seen the same as a man with a family carrying.

Hronisiver said:

Out children should be educated about the world not put smack dab in the middle of their parents opinions and politics.

Click to expand...

Do you not think that showing such hypocrisy and Rights restrictions as these is part of getting children educated about the world?

Hronisiver said:

Do you really want to read about some little girl being shot because she pulled a video camera out of her pocket to record her daddy being stopped by the police.

Click to expand...

Have you ever heard of such?

Hronisiver said:

I think a lot of people probably immediately want to argue that its not the dads or daughters fault and the cop pulled the trigger etc etc.... Me, id rather the hypothetical little girl still be alive instead of us getting another hypothetical scapegoat to argue about.

Click to expand...

I do not see that hypothetical as even remotely valid in such discussions.


What is your REAL beef? Are you here for the OC or not? Are you FOR Rights, or against?

wrightme said:

No, that is not accurate. It is a mindset that is more in keeping with "change the status quo."

Some LE seem to believe they have powers that are not actual. It is entirely proper to challenge this when encountered. Why do you not agree with this? What is it about citizens standing up for their Rights that has you all in a tizzy?



I see you are fairly new to these forums. How do you feel about some of the other Rights beyond the 2nd? How are you about the 4th and 5th amendments? Do you support those Rights?

Click to expand...

This is where the big gap in our opinions seems to become apparent.

Think about this situation: A man "gets into" the 2nd ammendment and OCing and decides its his new favorite hobby. Now he enjoys going out OCing JUST to get the attentiona nd to be unique and provacative. He spends his time trying to find places he think will bring him the most attention and the best opportunities to record some action.

In your mind, when this guy gets stopped, giving the cop a hard time and "asserting your rights" is what you consider standing up for your rights and you are incorrect.

Its called being a big difficult immature child.

If an officer hassles you, you stand your ground and assert your rights, not look at it as an opportunity to "set him straight" or educate him. You wont educate anyone, you will just be seen as a jerk. If the officer is being an ******* and stepping out of line then you take it up with his superior and go about things in a way that will BENEFIT the 2nd ammendment, not give you a snazzy new clip for youtube.

Im certainly not in a "tizzy" about people putting their rights to use, but im not a fan of people standing behind those rights and using them for reasons they were put there for. For instance, shouting "BECAUSE ITS MY RIGHT ITS MY 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHT!!!!" in a cops face just because he said "excuse me sir i noticed you were carrying a firearm, do you mind if a see your ID?"

Keep in mind that the 2nd amendment, which i fully support and practice everyday, was put in place to offer people protection, not a chance to "get back" at cops that dont know any better.

I support all rights given to us as american citizens, but i dont agree with the way that everyone goes about using them. Does that make me unamerican? Are you unamerican when you want to punch that gray haired lady from WBBC everytime she opens her ignorant mouth? No of course you arent.

Hronisiver said:

Ok. Can you please cite or offer a link to why what you just said is correct? You made a claim and now you are required to support that claim in response to my challenge. So if, at this point, you cannot produce any cite regarding when its appropriate or required to produce a link, does that mean that you havent supported your claim and are incorrect? Which would make me correct and, by default, erase your status of being incorrect because by being proven incorrect you were actually admonished of said incorrectness?

We have now entered the twilight zone.

.

Click to expand...

Huh!?


You do know that this site has a rule about "cite to authority" for rule of law, correct? Also, do you really feel that if someone presents a claim, they are not required to support it with facts when challenged? Think about that one for a bit. If I were to state that you are not required to have a DL to drive a car, would you believe me?

Hronisiver said:

This is where the big gap in our opinions seems to become apparent.

Think about this situation: A man "gets into" the 2nd ammendment and OCing and decides its his new favorite hobby. Now he enjoys going out OCing JUST to get the attentiona nd to be unique and provacative. He spends his time trying to find places he think will bring him the most attention and the best opportunities to record some action.

In your mind, when this guy gets stopped, giving the cop a hard time and "asserting your rights" is what you consider standing up for your rights and you are incorrect.

Click to expand...

Frankly, that is entirely sane. Why do you disagree?

Hronisiver said:

Its called being a big difficult immature child.

Click to expand...

WHY? What about standing up for Rights is it that you do not seem to agree with? How do YOU believe that carry of firearms will ever be accepted, if people do not do it?

Hronisiver said:

If an officer hassles you, you stand your ground and assert your rights, not look at it as an opportunity to "set him straight" or educate him. You wont educate anyone, you will just be seen as a jerk. If the officer is being an ******* and stepping out of line then you take it up with his superior and go about things in a way that will BENEFIT the 2nd ammendment, not give you a snazzy new clip for youtube.

Click to expand...

So, how do you feel such actions by LE will EVER change if such opportunities are not used to educate LE? Why do you seem to believe it will only result in having it be the citizen being "seen as a jerk?" Sure there are those out there, but not all are such. You paint with a broad brush.

Hronisiver said:

Im certainly not in a "tizzy" about people putting their rights to use, but im not a fan of people standing behind those rights and using them for reasons they were put there for.

Click to expand...

WHAT? You are FOR Rights, but are NOT FOR using them for reasons they were put there for?

Hronisiver said:

For instance, shouting "BECAUSE ITS MY RIGHT ITS MY 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHT!!!!" in a cops face just because he said "excuse me sir i noticed you were carrying a firearm, do you mind if a see your ID?"

Click to expand...

Kind of hyperbolic there, don't you think?

Hronisiver said:

Keep in mind that the 2nd amendment, which i fully support and practice everyday, was put in place to offer people protection, not a chance to "get back" at cops that dont know any better.

Click to expand...

No, the 2nd amendment was not put there for any "get back" at cops. That is the 1st amendment that supports that action.

Hronisiver said:

I support all rights given to us as american citizens, but i dont agree with the way that everyone goes about using them. Does that make me unamerican? Are you unamerican when you want to punch that gray haired lady from WBBC everytime she opens her ignorant mouth? No of course you arent.

Click to expand...

Huh? So now it is to some 'unamerican' thing for you? And what does some gray haired lady from somewhere have to do with a thing?

You do not have to agree with how others go about "using" rights. But, your disagreement with how others do so does NOT mean you are right and they are wrong. It just means that you don't act the same.

NavyLCDR said:

Yes, I would believe you, but I fail to see the relevence of that.... :lol:

Click to expand...

The relevance is this. Simply stating something does not make it true, or even worth spending time discussing. If the person presenting something as if it were fact really believes the claim, AND desires intelligent discourse on a topic, presenting the background up front puts EVERYONE on the same common ground to begin.

Too many people tend to trot out baseless opinion as if it WAS an undeniable fact. And they get evasive when requests for the basis come to the fore. Frankly, in those cases, it is quite relevant to simply deny the claim.

NavyLCDR said:

The following is not directed at you, wrightime... a right is a right, who are we to judge what "appropriate" ways are to exercise that right and what ways are not "appropriate"?

Click to expand...

Yep, hronisiver seems to want to say his way is the right way, and other ways aren't.

Hronisiver said:

^^^^ again, another good example of a really ****** mindset thats been going around lately. The "You wasted 5 minutes of my time now prepare to be sued for my trouble" attitude that people seem to love to employ. I wonder how many people here are going to strap on a recorder and go TRY to get stopped today just so they can pull this attitude...

Click to expand...

I carry a recorder because I had been stopped for two hours (not five minutes) and had nothing to back up my word regarding the unlawful behavior of the officers. The second time I was stopped, I had a recorder going. The city has not stopped an OCer since. I did not have to sue.

However, some folks have been so abused that they need very much to sue. The OCer in Philly who was detained at gunpoint comes to mind.

I agree that folks should not set about setting up the police. The only poster here who did that (that I know of) was constantly criticized here for doing so, and was eventually banned. The overwhelming majority of folks here will be civil with the police who stop them, not just because it is the right thing to do, but also because, considering how closely the tape will be scrutinized afterward, it is the WISE thing to do!

wrightme said:

Oh, so it is someone exercising a Right in an area where others don't like it that gets you all in a tizzy?


I live in NV. That person was not what you seem to want to have him be an example of, was he?
Frankly, it is a very sad case of overbearing LE activity where is was not necessary. In addition, poor choice of how to respond by the victim in this instance. WHAT did he do wrong, in your eyes?

He was surrounded by officers who had weapons drawn on him and he decided to try and disarm himself and reached his hand down toward his gun.

Again, our different mindsets at work here.... You think a man should be able to reach for his gun while 20 cops are about to kill him because its his RIGHT to do so and because its not illegal. My mind says dont reach for the damn gun or you are probably going to die, at which point your rights mean exactly zilch. You think that guys family would rather have had his rights stepped on instead of his life extinguished, regardless of whos at fault? Id bet money that they would.

The reaction of others is not the creation of ours. Frankly, for me, OC with the family is more about the reason to OC than about "moral support." But, the reality is that a single person carrying is NOT seen the same as a man with a family carrying.
Do you not think that showing such hypocrisy and Rights restrictions as these is part of getting children educated about the world?

I think you kind of proved my point here. You said " A single man carrying is not viewed the same as a man with a family carrying. You agree that having your family with your changes your image and thus its not exactly impossible to think that someone would bring their family as a MEANS of furthering their "2nd amendment experience" so to speak.

Educating children... hopefully you will not teach them to reach for a weapon while having guns pointed at them just because its their right to carry. That is my point. A certain level of common sense needs to be used by people carrying firearms because when it comes down to it your rights mean nothing and who fault it is will be meaningless if some nervous rookie cop shoots you in the chest on his first day out because he didnt know how to deal with a lawful OCer who decided to put the screws to him for a good youtube video.

Have you ever heard of such?
I do not see that hypothetical as even remotely valid in such discussions.

I have heard a few people on this forum discuss how they tell their children to start recording if they see their parents get stopped by a cop. Frankly im not searching through the forum to find the posts in order to satisfy an cite requirement but im nto here to lie that serves nobodies best interests. You say it hasnt happened, or hasnt been proven, so therefor it has no bearing but id beg to differ. You cannot deny that officers make really stupid decisions sometimes and im sure we have all seen videos of officers shooting unarmed people just because they got nervous and saw a slight movement, its is certainly not out fo the realm of possibility that an officer, having stopped a man with a firearm, shoots a younger person as they pull something dark and unidentifiable from their clothes.

Again, in your mind without a cite its impossible, in my mind im thing why take the chance and put a child at risk?


What is your REAL beef? Are you here for the OC or not? Are you FOR Rights, or against?

Click to expand...

I dont have a beef. You dont like my differing opinions and apparently that is YOUR beef my friend. I support intelligent carrying of firearms. If you support idiots making videos of themselves carrying on youtube so they can make a few bucks a month off of it then thats your right.

MAybe you are just TOO into carrying as a hobby and not as a way of self defense and perhaps that why you take offense at my opinion of people who go out of their way to cause trouble. Is just simply OCing looking for trouble? NO. Is turning on your video camera before you leave the house, strapping a pistol to each hip, slinging your ak over your back and walking by the police station and down mainstreet to 711 so you can get some oreos looking for trouble?

How in the hell could you say it isnt? Again...... Common sense.

Hronisiver said:

I dont have a beef. You dont like my differing opinions and apparently that is YOUR beef my friend. I support intelligent carrying of firearms. If you support idiots making videos of themselves carrying on youtube so they can make a few bucks a month off of it then thats your right.

Click to expand...

No, my "beef" is to your seeming desire to attempt to dictate your view as the ONLY valid one.
I support 2nd Amendment exercise. I do not place the same limits on what is "acceptable" as you might.

hronisiver said:

MAybe you are just TOO into carrying as a hobby and not as a way of self defense and perhaps that why you take offense at my opinion of people who go out of their way to cause trouble. Is just simply OCing looking for trouble? NO. Is turning on your video camera before you leave the house, strapping a pistol to each hip, slinging your ak over your back and walking by the police station and down mainstreet to 711 so you can get some oreos looking for trouble?

Click to expand...

No, I take exception to your "broadbrush" painting of those you do not agree with.

hronisiver said:

How in the hell could you say it isnt? Again...... Common sense.

Click to expand...

No, not "common sense." Just your choice, that you desire to force onto others.
So, once again to your "it is MY opinion, so it must be right?" It isn't right simply because it agrees with you, and it isn't wrong simply because it doesn't agree with you.


As for the rest, the off-green isn't good for differentiating who wrote what?


Scott was not OC, from what I have read. He was inadvertant CC-exposure, and Costco overreacted. And, the reports of what happened were varied. AND, the video from Costco was "being reviewed," then was somehow "lost."

Frankly, the reports of what happened leave the reality a bit too unclear to call that one. But, from what I gather, He did NOT OC into costco to make a point. He was simply there and became a victim of trigger-fingers. I understand that several LE gave commands, and he chose (for whatever reason) to not follow the "don't move" and instead chose to follow the "drop the gun," causing him to reach to disarm, and then he was shot.


I do not KNOW that is what happened, but that IS my understanding from the varied reports I read. But, the events leading up to that sure did not seem to indicate ANY reason to evacuate Costco and have multiple LE at the store with weapons drawn. And, it was NOT an example of "OCer going to a place to get attention."

Hronisiver said:

A man is strapping a firearm onto his hip and bringing his family to a location where he knows he is not welcome, in an attempt to stir the pot and get attention. Are you in disagreement that people who have OCed have been shot and killed or or do you require cites for that as well?

http://snardfarker.ning.com/forum/topics/man-killed-by-police-in-costco

A very sad case of people on both ends not acting intelligently that ended with this mans death. His girlfriend was right beside him the entire time and was also at risk of being shot.

Now take that type of situation and add to the fact that some people go out of their way to find places that are anti-gun AND they bring their family along for "moral support" and youve just got a bad situation on your hands.

Out children should be educated about the world not put smack dab in the middle of their parents opinions and politics.

Do you really want to read about some little girl being shot because she pulled a video camera out of her pocket to record her daddy being stopped by the police.

I think a lot of people probably immediately want to argue that its not the dads or daughters fault and the cop pulled the trigger etc etc.... Me, id rather the hypothetical little girl still be alive instead of us getting another hypothetical scapegoat to argue about.

Click to expand...

Scott was not OC. Furthermore, he was under the influence of drugs. Using the example of his behavior to make your point about OCers making trouble is horribly off-point.

Who on this board has posted about having done the behaviors that you are decrying? I will, right along side you, decry claims of deliberately setting up the police, being rude to them for rudeness sake, or deliberately carrying where one knows carry is not welcome. The folks here hardly do any of those things at all, and you will see it criticized here when someone boasts of such behavior.

wrightme said:

The relevance is this. Simply stating something does not make it true, or even worth spending time discussing. If the person presenting something as if it were fact really believes the claim, AND desires intelligent discourse on a topic, presenting the background up front puts EVERYONE on the same common ground to begin.

Too many people tend to trot out baseless opinion as if it WAS an undeniable fact. And they get evasive when requests for the basis come to the fore. Frankly, in those cases, it is quite relevant to simply deny the claim.

Yep, hronisiver seems to want to say his way is the right way, and other ways aren't.

Click to expand...

I seem to want to say? You arent even putting words in my mouth you are putting them in my mind before i even think them. Remarkable.

I have trouble wanting to even continue the discussion after hearing you say that someone going out and recording themselves walking around carrying a gun LOOKING FOR TROUBLE is in the right. That just begets any amount of common sense dude.

You asked how we were ever going to get the carrying of firearms to be accepted and at the same time advocate people going out and doing stupid things just because its their right. A good start to spreading positive ideas is to PROVE why its a good thing, not trying to convince people its good JUST because you can do it.

"A right is a right"..... Its my right to carry a firearm and its my right to say what i wish and have any opinions or ideas that i wish. Does that make it the right thing to do for me to walk down the street back and forth calling people every rude, racist, sexist, discriminatory thing i can think of while im waving two shotguns around in the air? ITs probably my right to do so in many places but it doesnt make it ok, coming from a common sense standpoint.

Why justify any good or bad thing you do on the fact that its legal or that its your right? How is that different than a cop hassling you for carrying just because he can?

Hronisiver said:

I think you kind of proved my point here. You said " A single man carrying is not viewed the same as a man with a family carrying. You agree that having your family with your changes your image and thus its not exactly impossible to think that someone would bring their family as a MEANS of furthering their "2nd amendment experience" so to speak.

Click to expand...

It is not impossible to think that. It is not impossible for it to be entirely valid and acceptable. Why do you seem to not see that part?

Hronisiver said:

Educating children... hopefully you will not teach them to reach for a weapon while having guns pointed at them just because its their right to carry.

Click to expand...

That is simply ridiculous. Hyperbole. Has ANYONE advocated such a position, or presented it as even REMOTELY valid?

Hronisiver said:

That is my point. A certain level of common sense needs to be used by people carrying firearms because when it comes down to it your rights mean nothing and who fault it is will be meaningless if some nervous rookie cop shoots you in the chest on his first day out because he didnt know how to deal with a lawful OCer who decided to put the screws to him for a good youtube video.

Click to expand...

Common sense is valid. hyperbolic examples do not equate to some accurate way of pointing out something you do not understand as "not common sense."

eye95 said:

Scott was not OC. Furthermore, he was under the influence of drugs. Using the example of his behavior to make your point about OCers making trouble is horribly off-point.

Who on this board has posted about having done the behaviors that you are decrying? I will, right along side you, decry claims of deliberately setting up the police, being rude to them for rudeness sake, or deliberately carrying where one knows carry is not welcome. The folks here hardly do any of those things at all, and you will see it criticized here when someone boasts of such behavior.

Click to expand...

As i said before if you skim through threads regarding negative OC encounters you will see plenty of people saying "OH they gave you a hard time there? I go by there on my way to work, i think ill stop in and see what they say". I have even heard a few people exclaiming how they were going by with their family, one person even talking about how he taught his very young daughter to record him just in case(aimed specifically at police encounters).

The example i pointed out("Scott") was simply regarding his decision to try and disarm himself. You guys looked past that and decided to go on the defensive regarding OCing. My argument was not about his type of carry or about him looking for trouble, it was about his decision to reach for his gun. He was also, from what i read, on prescribed medication, not "drugs" in the criminal way you implied.

Hronisiver said:

I seem to want to say? You arent even putting words in my mouth you are putting them in my mind before i even think them. Remarkable.

I have trouble wanting to even continue the discussion after hearing you say that someone going out and recording themselves walking around carrying a gun LOOKING FOR TROUBLE is in the right. That just begets any amount of common sense dude.

Click to expand...

WHY do you see that as invalid? Seriously? Why? Just because you would not do so?

Hronisiver said:

You asked how we were ever going to get the carrying of firearms to be accepted and at the same time advocate people going out and doing stupid things just because its their right. A good start to spreading positive ideas is to PROVE why its a good thing, not trying to convince people its good JUST because you can do it.

Click to expand...

Speaking of "putting words in mouths." I do not advocate "doing stupid things." But, it seems that to you, if a person is not simply going from point a to point b during [what you feel is] normal day-to-day activities, they are "doing something stupid?"

Hronisiver said:

"A right is a right"..... Its my right to carry a firearm and its my right to say what i wish and have any opinions or ideas that i wish. Does that make it the right thing to do for me to walk down the street back and forth calling people every rude, racist, sexist, discriminatory thing i can think of while im waving two shotguns around in the air? ITs probably my right to do so in many places but it doesnt make it ok, coming from a common sense standpoint.

Click to expand...

No, I highly doubt that such action can be considered legal.
Once again, you resort to hyperbole.

Hronisiver said:

Why justify any good or bad thing you do on the fact that its legal or that its your right? How is that different than a cop hassling you for carrying just because he can?

Click to expand...

Once again putting words in my mouth.

I do NOT justify bad things. But, you seem to see those things that YOU would not choose to do [whether legal or not] as "bad things."

Try this instead. Support lawful behavior, I do. Bring unlawful behavior to the light of day, I do. The rest is simply whether it is sensible to each person or not, and if it is lawful, becomes the choice of each individual.

wrightme said:

It is not impossible to think that. It is not impossible for it to be entirely valid and acceptable. Why do you seem to not see that part?
That is simply ridiculous. Hyperbole. Has ANYONE advocated such a position, or presented it as even REMOTELY valid?
Common sense is valid. hyperbolic examples do not equate to some accurate way of pointing out something you do not understand as "not common sense."

Click to expand...

You advocated the position that theres nothing wrong with bringing your children and family on a just-for-fun OC trip because it helps your image.

You also seem to be hell bent on this theory that i think my opinion is the only opinion. Im not sure how more simply i could explain this to you- you are 110% incorrect in that assumption. I already todl you once that i never said i thought my opinion was the only correct one and you still go ahead and try to make it seem that way..... you even went as far as to put something in quotes that i never even said, so dont talk to me about hyperbole.

Just because we have different views doesnt mean we cant be nice to eachother broseph.