• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Thank you John Lott

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
The 2A covers both modes of carry. It does not stipulate between the two.

Any individual espousing the limiting or regulating of either is simply not supporting the RTKABA but is just another anti gun , anti RTKABA, anti 2a individual. If they realize it or admit it doesn't change that fact.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
I stand by my assessment of your post. You did not take issue with his words. You went full-on ad hominem with your words. IMO, those words were a shameful display of hatred.

Were I John, I would take down your post, 33-35, and this one. This sub-conversation is an embarrassing display.

BTW, I reported this post, my own post, to bring to John’s attention my recommendation.
Well, I reckon I could report my post to bring attention to my recommendation not to allow anti RTKABA folks on a gun forum .

I won't however because I imagine he would pay about as much attention to "my recommendation" as a fart in a tornado.
About the same consideration your recommendation should or will get.

That and my ego would need alot more inflation to even consider that type of self important arrogant action.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
More from Dr. Lott on his view of OC, from June 2015.

At the 1:00 minute mark.

At the 3:00 minute mark.Does Dr. Lott believe that OC is not as safe mode of carry as CC? I do conclude that this is his position.

Once you get past the "OCers are shot first" canard Dr. Lott acknowledges that OC does deter crime, in a round about fashion, without actually stating it explicitly.

The primary goal of OC, and why I OC as often as I can, is to deter crime from befalling me and mine, not you Dr. Lott. You are responsible for your own safety. If my OC "bubble" happens to extend to you and yours, thus by deterring a criminal act that could harm you and yours, you are welcome Dr. Lott.

Dr. Lott seems to promote the CCer as a community protector, a safety mechanism when a cop is not around. Being able to stop crime once crime is afoot. Unfortunate it is that Dr. Lott holds these views in my opinion.

Deterrence should be the standard.
I’ve always thought the most analogous comparison to the OC/CC comparison is the one between uniformed cops and plain-clothesed cops.

Uniformed cops usually stop trouble before it even happens due to their mere presence. Plain-closthesed cops are better at catching the bad guy after the trouble happens.

That choice is a tactical one. The actual battle over Rights should be unlicensed carry (UC) v. licensed carry.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
I’ve always thought the most analogous comparison to the OC/CC comparison is the one between uniformed cops and plain-clothesed cops.

Uniformed cops usually stop trouble before it even happens due to their mere presence. Plain-closthesed cops are better at catching the bad guy after the trouble happens.

That choice is a tactical one. The actual battle over Rights should be unlicensed carry (UC) v. licensed carry.

There really shouldn't be a battle at all.

OC if you want or CC. As long as its your personal choice and not mandated by regulations. I'm behind you all the way.

As far as licences, ffl regulations etc etc there shouldn't be a battle there either .

All of it is illegal , in violation. of the 2a.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
There really shouldn't be a battle at all.

OC if you want or CC. As long as its your personal choice and not mandated by regulations. I'm behind you all the way.

As far as licences, ffl regulations etc etc there shouldn't be a battle there either .

All of it is illegal , in violation. of the 2a.
Please recheck my use of the word “battle”. I did not use it in the context you seem to think I did.

In relation to OC/CC, is used the word “comparison” and referred to it as a “tactical choice”.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,347
Location
White Oak Plantation
I’ve always thought the most analogous comparison to the OC/CC comparison is the one between uniformed cops and plain-clothesed cops.

Uniformed cops usually stop trouble before it even happens due to their mere presence. Plain-closthesed cops are better at catching the bad guy after the trouble happens.

That choice is a tactical one. The actual battle over Rights should be unlicensed carry (UC) v. licensed carry.
I agree. In the near term, unlicensed carry is a more attainable goal and a stepping stone to unrestricted carry.
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
768
Location
Central Ky.
I agree. In the near term, unlicensed carry is a more attainable goal and a stepping stone to unrestricted carry.
Oh, Oh. Now you have done it. There are those here that will never accept any "stepping stones". You just crossed the line. They must have full UNRESTRICTED carry NOW. If you support a "stepping stone" you will automatically be a sellout and statist. You are now out of the clubhouse. If you repent and beg forgiveness they might let you back in. Besides, the clubhouse is getting a lot of empty spaces as the true believers see that good things can be accomplished little by little. Only a few remain attached to the dogma, those few will accept no less than ultimate and immediate victory.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,240
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Oh, Oh. Now you have done it. There are those here that will never accept any "stepping stones". You just crossed the line. They must have full UNRESTRICTED carry NOW. If you support a "stepping stone" you will automatically be a sellout and statist. You are now out of the clubhouse. If you repent and beg forgiveness they might let you back in. Besides, the clubhouse is getting a lot of empty spaces as the true believers see that good things can be accomplished little by little. Only a few remain attached to the dogma, those few will accept no less than ultimate and immediate victory.
Stepping stones if necessary. Not that I agree, but what bugs me is giving a name to a cause that is a misnomer. Like "The patriot Act," "Constitutional Carry." We have constitutional carry----Woo-hoo! It is not constitutional carry. It is the removal of a licensing/taxing scheme. That's it. If it was constitutional carry, a whole series of laws would evaporate, gone, never to exist again.
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
768
Location
Central Ky.
Well, I can see we have offended you. You may call it anything you want and I will call it anything I want. Oh, by the way, what do you have in Ohio?
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
Oh, Oh. Now you have done it. There are those here that will never accept any "stepping stones". You just crossed the line. They must have full UNRESTRICTED carry NOW. If you support a "stepping stone" you will automatically be a sellout and statist. You are now out of the clubhouse. If you repent and beg forgiveness they might let you back in. Besides, the clubhouse is getting a lot of empty spaces as the true believers see that good things can be accomplished little by little. Only a few remain attached to the dogma, those few will accept no less than ultimate and immediate victory.
In reality ,stepping stones ,in the right direction , aren't bad.
It's when those stepping stones take a step backward, giving up part of a the RTKABA, in order to gain a false step forward ,ending up with a net loss that steps are bad.

Examples would be the NRA permit less cc bill a few yrs back in Ky , that you first came out supporting , then backed away from when nobody else would accept it, that would have introduced FOL signage and 25 dollar fines. A huge step backwards had it passed.

Or Moore's campus carry bill that unconstitutionally requires a permit to OC on campus. An illegal and disastrous leap backwards.

Steps forward are great. Most " steps" though are not forward. They almost always trade away much more than they gain.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Well, I can see we have offended you. You may call it anything you want and I will call it anything I want. Oh, by the way, what do you have in Ohio?
We have licensed CC and unlicensed OC, with many restrictions in a convoluted, hard to read, easy to break law.

Some examples of anticonstitutional restrictions on unlicensed OC:

  1. Cannot carry loaded in a vehicle.
  2. Cannot carry in a Class D liquor establishment—even if not drinking and not under the influence.
  3. Cannot carry in a school zone.

The laws in Ohio are amazingly similar to the laws in Alabama when I lived there. Ohio managed to do it using about three times as many words.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
For those of you that have not seen this a dozen times, here is the state's rationale for the firearms ban on college campuses.
Opinion of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Ky. # 96-40.

https://ag.ky.gov/government/opinions/Opinions New/OAG9640.doc
As your fond of saying, the AGs opinion is not a law. Its an opinion.

Of a obviously anti gun AG.

Now that we have permit less carry we should begin a hard push to amend the ky constitution back to the version that said shall not be questioned.

The AGs opinion ,using the small number of court cases concerning the subject of OC really did nothing.

Evidenced by the state studiously avoiding passing legislation regulating OC.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,240
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Well, I can see we have offended you. You may call it anything you want and I will call it anything I want. Oh, by the way, what do you have in Ohio?
No, not at all. We have a difference of opinion. You're the one playing the antagonism card. Ohio has nothing to do with it. The conceal carry groups bought into a con job in believing that not paying his master a tax for the privilege of carrying concealed just bestowed upon them a right. That is all it is.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,627
Location
here nc
I agree. In the near term, unlicensed carry is a more attainable goal and a stepping stone to unrestricted carry.
Might i qualify from this member’s perception and add tis a return to the way it used to be when firearms, yes depending on the part of the country - even LGs, were regularly carried by this County’s citizens in their daily activities.

Humm, some time before the institutionalization of police...hummm
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
768
Location
Central Ky.
We have licensed CC and unlicensed OC, with many restrictions in a convoluted, hard to read, easy to break law.

Some examples of anticonstitutional restrictions on unlicensed OC:

  1. Cannot carry loaded in a vehicle.
  2. Cannot carry in a Class D liquor establishment—even if not drinking and not under the influence.
  3. Cannot carry in a school zone.
The laws in Ohio are amazingly similar to the laws in Alabama when I lived there. Ohio managed to do it using about three times as many words.
I know this has changed recently, but doesn't Alabama have constitutional carry now? Doesn't seem like they are similar anymore.

With all the work that appears to need doing in Ohio, why do citizens of Ohio come to the Ky. sub-forum of OCDO and attempt to malign and diminish the advances in the RKBA in Ky.? Is it jealousy or is it just the feelings of impotence that comes with their own inability to make any meaningful advances in their own state?

Can anybody that lives or spends time in Ky. say that things are not better now that they were 25 years ago? We have an excellent concealed carry law, we have an effective preemption law and now we have constitutional carry. There are a few problems left, but they will be dealt with, in time. I hear a great deal of dissatisfaction from some people on this board, but I never hear any offers from them to join in and share the work required to make these advances come about. I never see them walking the hallways of the Capital annex, I never hear them testify in committee meetings, I never bump into them in the waiting rooms while waiting to talk to a legislator. I never see any donation come into KC3 to help pay the bills. All I ever see or hear from them is the whining that appears on the pages of OCDO. I suspect that these people do not work well in groups. You know, "does not play well with others." I also suspect that they do not want to expose themslves to the failures that naturally go along with working to change laws. We failed for four years before we got this done. It can be very frustrating. Not everybody can handle the fact that your failures will exceed your victories by a factor of 10.

I wish that changes could come more quickly and more completely in Ky. but I have come to see that by taking small steps we can accomplish something as opposed to screaming for more advanced reforms and pounding our chests to proclaim that we are the "true believers" in the constitution while gaining nothing for years and years. I think it can best be likened to a comparison between loud, blaring, vulgar rap music on the radio and the sound of a really fine orchestra playing beautiful classical music.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
I know this has changed recently, but doesn't Alabama have constitutional carry now? Doesn't seem like they are similar anymore.

With all the work that appears to need doing in Ohio, why do citizens of Ohio come to the Ky. sub-forum of OCDO and attempt to malign and diminish the advances in the RKBA in Ky.? Is it jealousy or is it just the feelings of impotence that comes with their own inability to make any meaningful advances in their own state?

Can anybody that lives or spends time in Ky. say that things are not better now that they were 25 years ago? We have an excellent concealed carry law, we have an effective preemption law and now we have constitutional carry. There are a few problems left, but they will be dealt with, in time. I hear a great deal of dissatisfaction from some people on this board, but I never hear any offers from them to join in and share the work required to make these advances come about. I never see them walking the hallways of the Capital annex, I never hear them testify in committee meetings, I never bump into them in the waiting rooms while waiting to talk to a legislator. I never see any donation come into KC3 to help pay the bills. All I ever see or hear from them is the whining that appears on the pages of OCDO. I suspect that these people do not work well in groups. You know, "does not play well with others." I also suspect that they do not want to expose themslves to the failures that naturally go along with working to change laws. We failed for four years before we got this done. It can be very frustrating. Not everybody can handle the fact that your failures will exceed your victories by a factor of 10.

I wish that changes could come more quickly and more completely in Ky. but I have come to see that by taking small steps we can accomplish something as opposed to screaming for more advanced reforms and pounding our chests to proclaim that we are the "true believers" in the constitution while gaining nothing for years and years. I think it can best be likened to a comparison between loud, blaring, vulgar rap music on the radio and the sound of a really fine orchestra playing beautiful classical music.
Most of the time ,capitulating , compromising a constitutional right to do "something' just for the sake of doing somthing does more harm than good.
Many times its better to stand on the constitution ,the law of the land , and do nothing rather than accepting unconstitutional, illegal regulations.

CCDW law is a good example. It was and infringement, violating both the ky constitution as well as the COTUS.

It passed in the mid nineties. Not accepted then by 2000 we would have had permit less concealed carry . Instead, " small ,unconstitutional steps " were taken to get ccdw passed in order to do "something".

Its taken all this time to get permit less cc in ky when doing something in the mid 90s let the state saddle us with a concealed carry law it had no authority to create in the first place . And all the regulations that went with it.
And some ky gun owners thought that was progress.

I can honestly say before ccdw I had never seen a no gun sign and open carried anywhere I wanted too .
And anyone wanting to cc simply did. As they had the right to do.

We don't have constitutional carry. No state does

What we have if the Gov signs it is ky " allowing " us to do what we already have a right to do without paying to do it . Though they still won't admit they have no authority to say who can and cannot carry.

Another is Goforths proposals that require permits OC in specific places and Moore's.

As to the rest. One Kc3 doesn't have a working website , that can be found anyway. Any question asked about usually gets you rudely jumping in with " why do you want to know".
Not a good fund raising plan.

And since you don't personally know every gun owner in ky why would you think you would know if you bumped into one.?

I'm glad permit less carry will be law here in ky. There should never have been a permit to carry to get rid of.

But so far its the only gun bill put forth this session worth supporting.
 
Top