What to say when people complain they are "uncomfortable" because of your gun?

[Grapeshot]

Originally Posted by Liberty-or-Death

IMO, those who support 2A and denigrate LG carriers as idiots are no different from antis that denigrate any carriers (except LEOs) as idiots. IMO.

I can see you're a stranger to nuance. Anyway, thanks for letting me know that your opinion is worthless. I'll keep that in mind going forward.

Waay too much snipping and sniping going on here. Not all activists see things in the same way - that does not make their opinion w/o value, no should a difference of opinion cause us to insult and thereby splinter our common alliance.

First let me say that I have met Liberty-or-Death and had some lengthy conversations with him. He is solidly in the corner of freedom and RKBA. That there are some points which IMO he should consider more/additional things is not to indicate that his opinion is worthless..........in fact he may be more right/correct than many of us care to admit, BUT the timing and degree he would seem to desire doesn't work in all cases. The likelihood of success is an element that we must all approach carefully when pushing our agenda.

I suspect that many (most?) of us here would agree that the 2A does in fact endorse/support/confirm a multitude of ways/means to express the RKBA, including with long guns.

Of course we have our Forum Rule pertaining to this - it is not our intention to promote other than handguns on these pages; however, the point being not the subject of long guns themselves, but determining what will work with the maximum effectiveness.

I would defend until my last breath one's right to carry whatever tool the chose to defend themselves and their loved ones AND their right to offer their thoughts on that subject. OTOH - we would strongly discourage (even not allow) LGs at our OC dinners and breakfasts - see next paragraph.

I divert from the course that some might argue is "the way" in that I look hard at what will carry the ball across the goal line. We must look at the most predictable reaction(s) of the public, media, politicians, and fence sitters when we tailor our strategy. Demand 100% now and we will most likely fail on our efforts. Sport teams and the military both look at their opponent's defense and probable reactions prior to stepping forward - so too must we be good strategists.

Please sirs, make peace with others who embrace RKBA, especial OC - paraphrasing a known quote, "Together we are a force to be reckoned with."

 

[WalkingWolf]

Waay too much snipping and sniping going on here. Not all activists see things in the same way - that does not make their opinion w/o value, no should a difference of opinion cause us to insult and thereby splinter our common alliance.

First let me say that I have met Liberty-or-Death and had some lengthy conversations with him. He is solidly in the corner of freedom and RKBA. That there are some points which IMO he should consider more/additional things is not to indicate that his opinion is worthless..........in fact he may be more right/correct than many of us care to admit, BUT the timing and degree he would seem to desire doesn't work in all cases. The likelihood of success is an element that we must all approach carefully when pushing our agenda.

I suspect that many (most?) of us here would agree that the 2A does in fact endorse/support/confirm a multitude of ways/means to express the RKBA, including with long guns.

Of course we have our Forum Rule pertaining to this - it is not our intention to promote other than handguns on these pages; however, the point being not the subject of long guns themselves, but determining what will work with the maximum effectiveness.

I would defend until my last breath one's right to carry whatever tool the chose to defend themselves and their loved ones AND their right to offer their thoughts on that subject. OTOH - we would strongly discourage (even not allow) LGs at our OC dinners and breakfasts - see next paragraph.

I divert from the course that some might argue is "the way" in that I look hard at what will carry the ball across the goal line. We must look at the most predictable reaction(s) of the public, media, politicians, and fence sitters when we tailor our strategy. Demand 100% now and we will most likely fail on our efforts. Sport teams and the military both look at their opponent's defense and probable reactions prior to stepping forward - so too must we be good strategists.

Please sirs, make peace with others who embrace RKBA, especial OC - paraphrasing a known quote, "Together we are a force to be reckoned with."

Forgive me I don't mean to be an arse, but I have to ask. Just how would you not allow LGOC at a public place? The only way I can think of is ask the management to trespass them. Sorry, I respect you a lot as both a member, and a moderator, but the one sentence troubled me.

 

[Liberty-or-Death]

Grape, I hope you understood my comment to mean what yours did, to discourage mutual denigration/sniping. We should not deliberately engage in volleys of friendly fire here, yet some here toss insults like they are playing catch with pinless hand grenades. It makes for some truly unenjoyable reading here, repeatedly tripping over verbal landmines rife with sarcasm and haughtiness. Whatever happened to liberty's attitude of, "live and let live"? (That was a rhetorical question, not an invitation for a history lesson.)

And as regards to rule #14. I've never considered it (unless I'm waking up to Red Dawn), but also would never mistreat anyone who did.

 

[Grapeshot]

Forgive me I don't mean to be an arse, but I have to ask. Just how would you not allow LGOC at a public place? The only way I can think of is ask the management to trespass them. Sorry, I respect you a lot as both a member, and a moderator, but the one sentence troubled me.

Yes threat of trespass is the primary anticipated means.

Our relationship with these restaurants is generally such that if someone tried to sit with us that was not acceptable for whatever reason, we would but have to ask and it would be granted.

At the breakfasts where there is seldom a separate area involved, we still enjoy an extremely good relationship with the various managements - they come to us for clarification on laws, procedures, etc.

Building good relationships with the right people is like building a good bridge - helps you get from there to here

 

[Grapeshot]

Grape, I hope you understood my comment to mean what yours did, to discourage mutual denigration/sniping. We should not deliberately engage in volleys of friendly fire here, yet some here toss insults like they are playing catch with pinless hand grenades. It makes for some truly unenjoyable reading here, repeatedly tripping over verbal landmines rife with sarcasm and haughtiness. Whatever happened to liberty's attitude of, "live and let live"? (That was a rhetorical question, not an invitation for a history lesson.)

And as regards to rule #14. I've never considered it (unless I'm waking up to Red Dawn), but also would never mistreat anyone who did.

I wasn't put off by your statement, nor saw reason to take offense. We understand each other - others don't or may not have the same benefit. That is why I tried to clarify.

 

[solus]

Waay too much snipping and sniping going on here. Not all activists see things in the same way - that does not make their opinion w/o value, no should a difference of opinion cause us to insult and thereby splinter our common alliance.

First let me say that I have met Liberty-or-Death and had some lengthy conversations with him. He is solidly in the corner of freedom and RKBA. That there are some points which IMO he should consider more/additional things is not to indicate that his opinion is worthless..........in fact he may be more right/correct than many of us care to admit, BUT the timing and degree he would seem to desire doesn't work in all cases. The likelihood of success is an element that we must all approach carefully when pushing our agenda.

I suspect that many (most?) of us here would agree that the 2A does in fact endorse/support/confirm a multitude of ways/means to express the RKBA, including with long guns.

Of course we have our Forum Rule pertaining to this - it is not our intention to promote other than handguns on these pages; however, the point being not the subject of long guns themselves, but determining what will work with the maximum effectiveness.

I would defend until my last breath one's right to carry whatever tool the chose to defend themselves and their loved ones AND their right to offer their thoughts on that subject. OTOH - we would strongly discourage (even not allow) LGs at our OC dinners and breakfasts - see next paragraph.

I divert from the course that some might argue is "the way" in that I look hard at what will carry the ball across the goal line. We must look at the most predictable reaction(s) of the public, media, politicians, and fence sitters when we tailor our strategy. Demand 100% now and we will most likely fail on our efforts. Sport teams and the military both look at their opponent's defense and probable reactions prior to stepping forward - so too must we be good strategists.

Please sirs, make peace with others who embrace RKBA, especial OC - paraphrasing a known quote, "Together we are a force to be reckoned with."

grape, i will acquiesce to your statement i bold'd...HOWEVER ~ i draw the line towards those individual(s) looking for their 15 min of fame or taunting the authorities to the detriment of everyone or to do so without any advancement of any cause!! it is acknowledged there are two kinds of attention, but negative attention does nothing expect irritate everyone.

ipse

 

[Grapeshot]

grape, i will acquiesce to your statement i bold'd...HOWEVER ~ i draw the line towards those individual(s) looking for their 15 min of fame or taunting the authorities to the detriment of everyone or to do so without any advancement of any cause!! it is acknowledged there are two kinds of attention, but negative attention does nothing expect irritate everyone.

ipse

I'm not in disagreeement with that.

 

[stealthyeliminator]

grape, i will acquiesce to your statement i bold'd...HOWEVER ~ i draw the line towards those individual(s) looking for their 15 min of fame or taunting the authorities to the detriment of everyone or to do so without any advancement of any cause!! it is acknowledged there are two kinds of attention, but negative attention does nothing expect irritate everyone.

ipse

Clearly you're attributing those characterizations to the LGOC movement in Texas, which is obviously lacking in logic and is additionally, arguably, a rule violation on at least two counts. Even if it is denied in this case, you've made these characterizations numerous times throughout the forum, so you can't escape that you've made these characterizations even if you deny that this instance is one such instance.

I'm not in disagreeement with that.

Since ol' grapey here has graciously opened the door with his (relative) agreement to your characterizations...

First of all, we know that the LGOC movement in Texas began as a direct, precise protest to a specific instance of government oppression. From there, and from that it grew. Not from egos, or loud personalities, or desires of grandeur or confrontation. Since that time, real and positive change in the application of law and practices of law enforcement has occurred in communities all across Texas. The simple fact of the matter is that communities now have more freedom as a result of the LGOC movement than they did prior. This is freedom that I have personally seen and experienced.

You may sit in your homes in Virginia and North Carolina and deny until the cows come home, but the fact of the matter is that I'm living it and experiencing it, and I pity those that can't help but deny truths that upset their senses.

Whatever you believe about the practice of LGOC, the truth remains that the movement here in Texas, which began as a direct and precise protest to a specific instance of egregious tyranny, [and which is not and has never been designed or intended to ultimately incorporate regular LGOC into every day life,] has awakened tens of thousands dormant liberty fighters.

 

[stealthyeliminator]

Bee Tee Dubs, on the topic of the thread, I can't recall a time off the top of my head that anyone has told me they were uncomfortable with my carrying a rifle. To the contrary, I've occasionally been surprised at the number of people so extremely comfortable with and unsurprised by it.

I think normally the people that say they'd be uncomfortable, especially online, are really all talk and don't know how they'd feel.

I've had significantly more people express that they're afraid other people might be uncomfortable than I've had people express discomfort.

People from all walks of life have been perfectly comfortable with it, from the working class, to business owners, local government employees, veterans, the more fortunate, the less fortunate, the list goes on.

The mischaracterizations by the North Carolinian with zero experience in the matter are hardly something a reasonable and logical person should be agreeable to.

ETA: To brief, generally speaking the complaints come from people like you that were not only not present, but actually half the country away. Additionally I'd actually venture to guess that the ratios of "negative":"positive" "encounters" between LGOC and HGOC are either similar, or it could even be that LGOC has a better ratio.

 

[Grapeshot]

Clearly you're attributing those characterizations to the LGOC movement in Texas, which is obviously lacking in logic and is additionally, arguably, a rule violation on at least two counts. Even if it is denied in this case, you've made these characterizations numerous times throughout the forum, so you can't escape that you've made these characterizations even if you deny that this instance is one such instance.



Since ol' grapey here has graciously opened the door with his (relative) agreement to your characterizations...

First of all, we know that the LGOC movement in Texas began as a direct, precise protest to a specific instance of government oppression. From there, and from that it grew. Not from egos, or loud personalities, or desires of grandeur or confrontation. Since that time, real and positive change in the application of law and practices of law enforcement has occurred in communities all across Texas. The simple fact of the matter is that communities now have more freedom as a result of the LGOC movement than they did prior. This is freedom that I have personally seen and experienced.

You may sit in your homes in Virginia and North Carolina and deny until the cows come home, but the fact of the matter is that I'm living it and experiencing it, and I pity those that can't help but deny truths that upset their senses.

Whatever you believe about the practice of LGOC, the truth remains that the movement here in Texas, which began as a direct and precise protest to a specific instance of egregious tyranny, [and which is not and has never been designed or intended to ultimately incorporate regular LGOC into every day life,] has awakened tens of thousands dormant liberty fighters.

Again I say, I cannot disagree with that.

There was a time when Forum Rule #14 contained an exception for Texas whereby LG carry and the discussion of it were permissible. When clearly the future was portended and OC of modern handguns was but a done deal in Texas, that exception was removed.

Texas has regained the equal status, right to stand alongside Virginia & North Carolina ......as we all strive to obtain Constitutional Carry. A battle has been won, but the fight is not over.

Foot note - 4 Virginians known to me (myself included) have been to Texas to attend a major conference of RKBA, one was a principal speaker - boots on the ground so to speak, but not as effective as the mobilization of the tens of thousands liberty fighters who truly carried the effort on their backs. Kudos to them all.


BTW - you can call me Grape, ol' grapey, GS, or any other term of endearment so long as you call me for dinner, when AAA batteries and ammo are being handed out free. :lol:

 

[stealthyeliminator]

Again I say, I cannot disagree with that.

There was a time when Forum Rule #14 contained an exception for Texas whereby LG carry and the discussion of it were permissible. When clearly the future was portended and OC of modern handguns was but a done deal in Texas, that exception was removed.

Texas has regained the equal status, right to stand alongside Virginia & North Carolina ......as we all strive to obtain Constitutional Carry. A battle has been won, but the fight is not over.

Foot note - 4 Virginians known to me (myself included) have been to Texas to attend a major conference of RKBA, one was a principal speaker - boots on the ground so to speak, but not as effective as the mobilization of the tens of thousands liberty fighters who truly carried the effort on their backs. Kudos to them all.


BTW - you can call me Grape, ol' grapey, GS, or any other term of endearment so long as you call me for dinner, when AAA batteries and ammo are being handed out free. :lol:

The exception was phrased such that it applied to present tense conditions. The legality of HGOC in Texas is unchanged from when the exception applied. I don't know when or why any change of heart was made on the matter, but whatever.

Additionally, as noted, the door wasn't opened by me, but by you. This isn't a discussion I brought up, or even wanted. But if denigration is to be allowed then certainly you can expect me to object to it. Solus' denigration has been a constant theme of his posts all throughout the forum, inside and outside of the Texas subforum.

 

[Bikenut]

While I understand the private property right of trespass and I understand folks wanting to limit who is invited to attend a function on private property I am a bit dismayed to see supporters of the right to bear arms willing to use one right against another just because someone is exercising the right to bear arms in a way considered unacceptable.

What I find discouraging is a willingness to use the property owner as a pawn to insure only those who are acceptable will be allowed to attend.

What is concerning is the message sent to the property owner that some bearing of arms is more acceptable than others.

I have question. If someone were to show up at the restaurant exercising the right to bear arms in a manner considered unacceptable........but was not interested, didn't know of, didn't care about the function...... would that person still be trespassed at the behest of those holding the function?

 

[Grapeshot]

While I understand the private property right of trespass and I understand folks wanting to limit who is invited to attend a function on private property I am a bit dismayed to see supporters of the right to bear arms willing to use one right against another just because someone is exercising the right to bear arms in a way considered unacceptable.

What I find discouraging is a willingness to use the property owner as a pawn to insure only those who are acceptable will be allowed to attend.

What is concerning is the message sent to the property owner that some bearing of arms is more acceptable than others.

I have question. If someone were to show up at the restaurant exercising the right to bear arms in a manner considered unacceptable........but was not interested, didn't know of, didn't care about the function...... would that person still be trespassed at the behest of those holding the function?

The private property owner is no pawn, but an intregal part of a verbal agreement.

Your latter query is strange, but as presented, absolutely not. I am troubled by what lead you to that thought though - would seem as though you have a rather low opinion of some of us.

 

[Bikenut]

The private property owner is no pawn, but an intregal part of a verbal agreement.

Your latter query is strange, but as presented, absolutely not. I am troubled by what lead you to that thought though - would seem as though you have a rather low opinion of some of us.

I asked to find out if those at the function were interested in the valid concern of limiting who is allowed to attend their private function only.... Or if there would be a desire to limit how the right to bear arms is exercised for all whether attending that function or not. Thank you for your answer.

There are folks on this forum that I hold in high esteem and there are some who's postings have given me cause for lesser regard.

 

[WalkingWolf]

While I understand the private property right of trespass and I understand folks wanting to limit who is invited to attend a function on private property I am a bit dismayed to see supporters of the right to bear arms willing to use one right against another just because someone is exercising the right to bear arms in a way considered unacceptable.

What I find discouraging is a willingness to use the property owner as a pawn to insure only those who are acceptable will be allowed to attend.

What is concerning is the message sent to the property owner that some bearing of arms is more acceptable than others.

I have question. If someone were to show up at the restaurant exercising the right to bear arms in a manner considered unacceptable........but was not interested, didn't know of, didn't care about the function...... would that person still be trespassed at the behest of those holding the function?

This baffles me also, it is exactly what MDA did with companies to attempt to ban OC. I have been biting my lip, but I do not find it acceptable, and shocking to say the least. That is why I questioned it, I only OC a handgun in public, but such attitudes would drive me away from any function. Not discussing LG on OCDO is one thing, using Bloomberg tactics is another.

 

[stealthyeliminator]

This baffles me also, it is exactly what MDA did with companies to attempt to ban OC. I have been biting my lip, but I do not find it acceptable, and shocking to say the least. That is why I questioned it, I only OC a handgun in public, but such attitudes would drive me away from any function. Not discussing LG on OCDO is one thing, using Bloomberg tactics is another.

The attitude comes awful close to that line between "I think they ought not" and "someone ought to stop them"

 

[Grapeshot]

The attitude comes awful close to that line between "I think they ought not" and "someone ought to stop them"

While our functions are open to all that OC, CC, or noC, the point is that it is first and foremost fellowship among friends not to entertain the whims of others....no mater how legitimate they may be.

Me thinks too much is being read in, seen between the lines.

 

[WalkingWolf]

While our functions are open to all that OC, CC, or noC, the point is that it is first and foremost fellowship among friends not to entertain the whims of others....no mater how legitimate they may be.

Me thinks too much is being read in, seen between the lines.

Most of the oppression particularly gun rights have come from failure to read between the lines. I respect you, but not this, it is no different then actions of the MDA. While I can respect making a request, but making demands that are enforced by private business is, IMO, frightening, and exactly how we became PC obsessed society. Especially if you take into account that while your meetings have but a few days out of the year, your attitude, phobias, prejudices lay the groundwork for 24/7 discrimination.

Don't want them at your meetings, find a closed hall, or meeting room. But for some unsuspecting person to walk in with a long gun at anytime, whether during a meet or not, and getting turned away because of lack of tolerance that you created is unwholesome.

I hope you will not take this as an insult, it is just one are where not only can I not agree, I am shocked.

 

[Grapeshot]

--snipped--......... as presented, absolutely not. ......

Most of the oppression particularly gun rights have come from failure to read between the lines. I respect you, but not this, it is no different then actions of the MDA. While I can respect making a request, but making demands that are enforced by private business is, IMO, frightening, and exactly how we became PC obsessed society. Especially if you take into account that while your meetings have but a few days out of the year, your attitude, phobias, prejudices lay the groundwork for 24/7 discrimination.

Don't want them at your meetings, find a closed hall, or meeting room. But for some unsuspecting person to walk in with a long gun at anytime, whether during a meet or not, and getting turned away because of lack of tolerance that you created is unwholesome.

I hope you will not take this as an insult, it is just one are where not only can I not agree, I am shocked.

Really?

When presented with that specific scenario of someone walking in OCing a LG and asked if we would pressure the property owner to trespass that person, the answer was clearly "No."

What part of "absolutely not" is not understood or did you just simply miss those words?

 

[WalkingWolf]

Yes threat of trespass is the primary anticipated means.

Our relationship with these restaurants is generally such that if someone tried to sit with us that was not acceptable for whatever reason, we would but have to ask and it would be granted.

At the breakfasts where there is seldom a separate area involved, we still enjoy an extremely good relationship with the various managements - they come to us for clarification on laws, procedures, etc.

Building good relationships with the right people is like building a good bridge - helps you get from there to here

This was your response to my original question, IMO you made it clear in that response that you would request the person be trespassed. Not to be argumentative, you did not clarify the circumstances, just that trespass was a option that would be used. And clearly that option would have repercussion well past the initial incident. Such as giving the business owner the impression that as a gun rights group that anything other than handgun OC is unacceptable. Sorta the same rational that resulted in the arrest of a soldier in Fayettenam for doing NOTHING illegal. It is those attitudes that are encouraged, whether it is realized or not. IOW you would be helping to shape the mental perception of others, just not yourself, even if it is not your intention.

Actions, as well words have meaning, and they are long lasting meaning.