# What would you do ? (open-carry rifle in Utah mall)



## pchinvegas (Jan 20, 2013)

Earlier today on my Face Book page I saw a picture of a man in a mall at what was described as a J C Penny's store in Utah. He had a rifle slung over his back, jeans and a tee shirt. The narrative stated that it was legal there and could be fully loaded.
Call me crazy, but if I encountered this I would had made my way out of there so fast. How would I know if this guy were up to no good, on a mission to get even with someone? Why would he feel the need for a rifle in a mall? 
I know, bad things happen but even IF he were the good guy with the gun do I want to be among those hit by the shots fired?
Oh, wait, he just exercising his 2nd Amendment Rights, well so are the bad guys until the do something wrong, right?
Holy Crap Maynard, I'm gonna shop online ! This would be too much.

What do you think?


----------



## maybenot (Jan 20, 2013)

It sounds as tho' it's the norm over there and if the folk around him aren't worried then I guess that says a lot,
now if that were in any mall/ market etc here in Australia we'd all be hitting the ground,lol


----------



## pchinvegas (Jan 21, 2013)

I live in Nevada and have never see that but then it is not lawful here. In my mind I just question anyone who feels that paranoid, defensive or scared that they think they need a gun loaded and ready on their person. I would be afraid.


----------



## TWHRider (Jan 21, 2013)

Since that type of thing is legal in Utah, it could also be his "rough-tough-stupid-male-ego" that is front and center.

Either way, it's moronic, IMO.  I was raised with guns; walking around a mall with one slung over the shoulder is not cute.  It's a perfect example of taking the Second Amendment waaaaay out of context; this is not the wild west days of old.

I would've probably met his stare head-on and wryly commented "whellll!  aren't you CUTE!"  Just enough for him to get the point yet hopefully not getting the d**n thing pointed at menthego:
The guy needs neutered - I still have my rusty-trusty butter knife somewhere-----------------------:shark:


----------



## pchinvegas (Jan 21, 2013)

Haha TWHRider, I agree. Everybody with a gun is a good guy till they do something bad or stupid.  I'll hold his legs for you!


----------



## maybenot (Jan 22, 2013)

I'd heard that crimes involving blunt instruments were on the rise ,lol


----------



## Steve (Jan 25, 2013)

I do have an "ole" soup spoon I could use...... LOL  ..... Or wait, how about my "salad tongs" ????

Here in Northern Ontario it isn't uncommon to see guys in a 4X4 during hunting season with a rifle but it is in a case and definitely NOT loaded.. The reason they carry it around is for theft reasons.. Someone will steal it if you left in the unit unattended.. This I understand but to carry it in public, you would have the police down your neck in seconds and with good reason......


----------



## Rotem55 (Jan 27, 2013)

Ignore It :\


----------



## R. Zimm (Jan 28, 2013)

There is always a context in these situations. For example, I work in a public library. At one point there was a guy coming in with a pistol on his belt. This made some people very nervous until I pointed out that he was dressed in a manner consistent with a detective or Federal Agent, he was meeting different people openly and talking to them for a period of time, they would shake hands when greeting and leaving, the type of pistol he carried was also consistent with a professional law enforcement officer, he always carried a set of folders which he would open and use during his meetings. Based on what I saw about this person caused me to comment that I felt safer with people like that in our library. If his overall "look" had been different I may have not felt the same about his presence.

The branch manager finally did ask him on the side and he was FBI and he was meeting potential witnesses regarding some investigation.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jan 28, 2013)

I have no problem with concealed carry, or open carry.  The rifle over the shoulder thing seems a bit much though layful:.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jan 30, 2013)

SeaBreeze said:


> I have no problem with concealed carry, or open carry.  The rifle over the shoulder thing seems a bit much though layful:.



Agreed. You can't take down the bad guys with good wishes. People fear that which they don't understand, and firearms are some of the least-understood items in our culture.

@ TWHRider - "this is not the wild west days of old" - you obviously haven't lived in some of the places I'VE lived in ... 

The last time I checked (2010), 12 states allowed full open-carry. That's almost a quarter of the US. They can't ALL be wrong ...


----------



## That Guy (Apr 12, 2013)

I see a cat with a carbine slung over his shoulder?  I turn and walk the other way.  Simple.


----------



## SifuPhil (Apr 12, 2013)

That Guy said:


> I see a cat with a carbine slung over his shoulder?  I turn and walk the other way.  Simple.



What if you're at the end of a dead-end alley? 

... questions, always questions ...


----------



## That Guy (Apr 12, 2013)

That's why it's called a dead end.


----------



## SifuPhil (Apr 12, 2013)

That Guy said:


> That's why it's called a dead end.



_Touché_. 

We superheroes just get sad when mortals decide to just walk away from conflict. Sure, sometimes it's the right thing to do ...

... but sometimes it isn't.

It's a wise person who can both tell the difference AND respond appropriately in each instance.


----------



## Happyflowerlady (Apr 12, 2013)

I think it is a real sign of how much our American society has gone off course nowadays . When I was in high school , most of the country boys were apt to drive the family pickup to school, and there was usually a gun rack with a hunting rifle in the back window. They also had a knife in a sheath on their belts. No one was ever afraid of being shot at, or otherwise harmed. The principal checked out the gun to admire it, not report it to the police.  We all went to the local drive-in for burgers, and no crazy person came in shooting people. 

Now, even if someone looks normal, but was carrying a gun, I would just get out of the area, just to be safe. The government wants to take guns away from law abiding citizens, but they never even mention getting them away from criminals..... How backwards is that ?


----------



## Ozarkgal (Apr 12, 2013)

Happyflowerlady said:


> I think it is a real sign of how much our American society has gone off course nowadays .  The government wants to take guns away from law abiding citizens, but they never even mention getting them away from criminals..... How backwards is that ?



I had a long response to this, but I think this pretty much sums it up....The government and country as we once knew it is gone, it's never coming back and the last three younger generations and beyond of people will never miss the rights, freedoms and morality they never knew....and sheesh, we thought the '60's and '70's were steeped in immorality and government corruption.


----------



## Anne (Apr 13, 2013)

Happyflowerlady and Ozarkgal, I agree with both of you.  It's a completely different world now, and I find it scary and sad.  I'm not sure how we got where we are, and it seems as though the younger generation doesn't know what real freedom is.  Trading some freedoms for 'security' isn't a problem for them, but I wonder that someday they'll realize what happened, and then it might be too late to turn things around.


----------



## SifuPhil (Apr 13, 2013)

Anne said:


> Happyflowerlady and Ozarkgal, I agree with both of you.  It's a completely different world now, and I find it scary and sad.  I'm not sure how we got where we are, and it seems as though the younger generation doesn't know what real freedom is.  *Trading some freedoms for 'security' isn't a problem for them, but I wonder that someday they'll realize what happened, and then it might be too late to turn things around*.



... and then China will annex the United States and all of our great-grandchildren will have jobs making cheap trinkets for Wal-Mart.


----------



## That Guy (Apr 13, 2013)

Too true.  Did I mention that handbasket . . . ?  Ah, yes, in another thread.  We've voted, we've marched in the streets, we've written our congressmen, we've written our editors, we've seen the writing on the wall, we've seen the writing at The Wall . . .    All to no avail.  I'm sorry folks (no I'm not . . . well, sorta....) but I quit!  I give up!  I'm stickin' my head in the sand until the next good wave comes along and then, I'm outta here...


----------



## Lady K (Apr 14, 2013)

I definitely would walk away and also give a heads up to some type of management or security.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 14, 2013)

I think if he was walking around with it slung across his back, dressed in jeans and a tee shirt, I wouldn't worry much about it.  When there are local gun shows in the vicinity, people carry the guns/rifles that they want to sell or trade, and carry the firearms that they just bought.

I doubt he was carrying it for protection at all, if there was a sticker of some sort on the gun, that would indicate that he just had attended a show.  When we go into wooded areas, there are lot of people who open carry their hunting rifles or open carry the pistols that they use for self protection.  I never had issue with that.

Don't know about this guy in the thread, and never did see the photo, but IMO, the more law abiding citizens possessing guns, either open or concealed, the less crime and chance of being robbed, raped, abused or killed by some jerk, junkie, nutjob or gang-banger.


----------



## That Guy (Apr 14, 2013)

The problem I have with everyone armed is the resultant shootout.  Not every gun-toting citizen is well trained in establishing lines-of-fire and muzzle discipline.


----------



## SifuPhil (Apr 14, 2013)

That Guy said:


> The problem I have with everyone armed is the resultant shootout.  Not every gun-toting citizen is well trained in establishing lines-of-fire and muzzle discipline.



Collateral damage.

To me, "gun control" MEANS muzzle discipline. 

I would think that just the well-publicized fact that _everyone_ is armed would be a major damper on most crime. I also don't think we'd revert to the Old West mentality - I think that in actuality the number of violent encounters is still well under 5%-10% and would only diminish as the hard-core repeat offenders are either incarcerated or buried.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 14, 2013)

That Guy said:


> Not every gun-toting citizen is well trained in establishing lines-of-fire and muzzle discipline.



Neither is every gun-toting law enforcement official for that matter.


----------



## That Guy (Apr 16, 2013)

SeaBreeze said:


> Neither is every gun-toting law enforcement official for that matter.




There has been an increasingly disturbing number of MURDERS of unarmed citizens by the police.  They are ALWAYS determined "justified" and the officers are exonerated.  "The cops don't need you and they expect the same." -- Bob Dylan


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 16, 2013)

Yes, I recall a case where a trigger-happy cop shot an innocent man in his own home, because through the window he saw the man holding a silver soda can, and he thought it was a gun.   Let's not get into all the poor friendly pet dogs they murdered for no valid reason, yeah...we'll tase them until their punchdrunk, then we'll noose them, and finish them off by emptying our revolver in them, yeah...that's the ticket!


----------



## That Guy (Apr 17, 2013)

After posting above, I thought all day and night about the tough job cops have.  They deal with the dregs of society on a daily basis and most are truly doing the best we can expect.  BUT (and a huge butt it is . . .)  There are too many "cowboys" on a power trip, jacked up on adrenaline.  Have had my share of encounters with the good, the bad and the ugly and would rather avoid them at all cost.

Speaking of innocent people being shot by cops . . .    I think the latest "fad" is innocent people being shot by stand-your-grounders who get away with it!


----------



## drifter (Apr 7, 2015)

I wouldn't do anything. I know we have laws allowing the carrying of guns but it should not be necessary in a civilized country. We are a civilized country, aren't we? Or have we slipped a few notches toward the Cockoo's nest?


.


----------



## applecruncher (Apr 7, 2015)

oops, I was looking for John Quinones.  nthego:


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 7, 2015)

*



			We are a civilized country, aren't we?
		
Click to expand...


Let's see... You work it out, Drifter

Civilized:  adjective
*

having a high state of culture and social development
cultured; polite ⇒ a civilized discussion
*Synonyms

cultured, educated, sophisticated, enlightened, humane, 
polite, mannerly, tolerant, gracious, courteous, affable, well-behaved, well-mannered


Insanity: noun
*

relatively permanent disorder of the mind; state or condition of being insane(law) 
a defect of reason as a result of mental illness, such that a defendant does not know what he or she is doing or that it is wrong 
utter folly; stupidity
*Synonyms

madness, mental illness, dementia, aberration, mental disorder, delirium, craziness, mental derangement,     
stupidity, folly, lunacy, irresponsibility, senselessness, preposterousness, 

I hope you can identify more with the first set of definitions than with the second*


----------



## SifuPhil (Apr 7, 2015)

drifter said:


> I wouldn't do anything. I know we have laws allowing the carrying of guns but it should not be necessary in a civilized country. We are a civilized country, aren't we? Or have we slipped a few notches toward the Cockoo's nest?
> .



A _few_ notches? 

The gear has broken off all of its teeth and is free-spinning at a high velocity ...


----------



## mitchezz (Apr 7, 2015)

As an outsider looking in I would think that the police's job would be a lot easier if just about everyone wasn't armed. Having lived my entire life in a country where very few would even contemplate owning a firearm it all seems way over the top. My daughter is moving to the USA this year and I'm quite nervous about her safety.


----------



## drifter (Apr 8, 2015)

Hi Mitchell, welcome to the forum. Most of us can live a lifetime in this country and never encounter any violence. Opinions are many when it comes to a discussion of guns. Not only do Americans like guns, we seem to like to argue about their place in our society. Police would be safer if there were no guns or if fewer people carried them. On the other hand we as a society have been too liberal in allowing police officers to discharge their weapons. We allow a knockout blow or the taking of aa life when a slap on the wrist would be sufficient. We have always been a nation of people where large portions of us liked to hunt game. In our early days hunting was necessary, then hunting became sport when hunting became unnecessary to feed the family. I come from a family of hunters and although I own no weapons now, I have in the past both owned weapons and hunted. I think the problem in the US is the great proliferation of guns. I feel it is entirely to easy for most of us to own a hand gun. Then there is the liberal interpretation of our constitution's second amendment where we all feel it is our right to own a gun, and it is, according to the laws off the land. Others, most I guess, find no fault with everyone owning a weapon . Still, law abiding people are generally safe in this country and very few encounter violence. I hope your daughter enjoys her stay in the USA.


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 8, 2015)

Anyone who has concerns about open carry in Utah (and that should be everyone) stay out of Arizona, here you can not only open carry but conceal as well and I mean WITHOUT a permit of any kind!  Thank you teaparty.


----------



## mitchezz (Apr 8, 2015)

drifter said:


> Hi Mitchell, welcome to the forum. Most of us can live a lifetime in this country and never encounter any violence. Opinions are many when it comes to a discussion of guns. Not only do Americans like guns, we seem to like to argue about their place in our society. Police would be safer if there were no guns or if fewer people carried them. On the other hand we as a society have been too liberal in allowing police officers to discharge their weapons. We allow a knockout blow or the taking of aa life when a slap on the wrist would be sufficient. We have always been a nation of people where large portions of us liked to hunt game. In our early days hunting was necessary, then hunting became sport when hunting became unnecessary to feed the family. I come from a family of hunters and although I own no weapons now, I have in the past both owned weapons and hunted. I think the problem in the US is the great proliferation of guns. I feel it is entirely to easy for most of us to own a hand gun. Then there is the liberal interpretation of our constitution's second amendment where we all feel it is our right to own a gun, and it is, according to the laws off the land. Others, most I guess, find no fault with everyone owning a weapon . Still, law abiding people are generally safe in this country and very few encounter violence. I hope your daughter enjoys her stay in the USA.




Thanks for the reassurances Drifter. I just don't understand the whole gun culture...if I had have had  a gun during my marriage I may well have been writing this from a gaol cell....too easy to pull a trigger. Life isn't perfect with gun control.....the crims still can get them and sometimes the police are too quick to shoot....but I think the majority of Australians are very happy they don't have guns.


----------



## BobF (Apr 8, 2015)

Sounds like most of you folks would never live long in Switzerland.   They often do go about with rifles on their back.   Going to military duty, gun shoots, lots of ways for them to use their rifles.   They walk with them, ride on buses and other public transport.   The idea of having weapons available in homes for sport or self defense is well understood by the Swiss.   We should have some of that knowledge right here in the US.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 8, 2015)

We've had guns for 40 years now, always a loaded one at the ready if needed.  Thankfully, we've never had to use the gun for self defense, like a home break-in, but rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it. Neither of us have concealed carry permits, but will get one in the future if we feel the need to.  

We don't hunt, mostly do some target practice now and then, but would hunt for food if need be.  There's nothing wrong with responsible law abiding citizens owning guns, there may be a time of civil unrest, homegrown terrorists attacking Americans or whatever, and those who can protect themselves and maybe others will be much appreciated by those without guns.  I don't think I'll see anything like that in my lifetime though, hoping not to anyway.


----------



## Ameriscot (Apr 9, 2015)

BobF said:


> Sounds like most of you folks would never live long in Switzerland.   They often do go about with rifles on their back.   Going to military duty, gun shoots, lots of ways for them to use their rifles.   They walk with them, ride on buses and other public transport.   The idea of having weapons available in homes for sport or self defense is well understood by the Swiss.   We should have some of that knowledge right here in the US.



They'd be happy in the UK.  Not a gun culture unless you count those who go hunting.  Even the cops don't have guns - only the special weapons squads.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 9, 2015)

That explains why in 2011 only two people were killed by police in England and Wales and 1,169 in the US.


----------



## Ameriscot (Apr 9, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> That explains why in 2011 only two people were killed by police in England and Wales and 1,169 in the US.



Can't find any statistics but I'm sure the number in Scotland is zero.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

Guess what!!!    The NRA is not allowing loaded guns that their convention in Tennessee!!  AND the pin must be pulled...  It wouldn't be safe after all..  lol!!!  oh the Irony!!   

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/07/1376216/-Gun-Control-at-NRA-Convention



> While guns may be  great in churches, schools, universities, bars and sitting in handbags next to toddlers in Walmart shopping carts — the National Rifle Association (NRA) isn’t so keen on guns at their Annual Convention.
> 
> The convention (April 10-12 in Nashville) is expected to draw a crowd of 70,000 people.  Naturally all of them are do-gooders — there to ogle, stroke and cling to the “16 acres of guns” (according to an ad for the event).  Among the 555 Exhibitors (according to the NRA’s event website) are Smith & Wesson, SigSauer, Beretta USA and Remington Arms.  So will there be guns? — you betcha.  Will they work? — uh, no.  Sorry, but these guns won’t fire.
> 
> According to the security plan that was adopted by the NRA soon after Nashville was chosen to host their annual convention — all guns on the convention floor will be nonoperational with the firing pins removed.  In addition, any guns purchased during the NRA convention will have to be picked up at a Federal Firearms License dealer (near the purchaser’s home) and will require a legal identification (I expect they mean at the time of pickup of said merchandise.)


----------



## SifuPhil (Apr 9, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> That explains why in 2011 only two people were killed by police in England and Wales and 1,169 in the US.



Don't forget the stats from 2001 - we lost over 3,000 people to just _four_ airplanes. Maybe we should make THOSE illegal as well ...


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> Don't forget the stats from 2001 - we lost over 3,000 people to just _four_ airplanes. Maybe we should make THOSE illegal as well ...



Fair enough Phil....  But at least then we should regulate guns as stringently as we do air travel..  Strict rules for ownership like stringent licensing and proof ability to handle the weapon... Like a pilot needs..    Let's make sure that all gun owners carry a whopping big liability insurance policy to protect any one who is injured or killed by their gun..  Like airlines carry.   Lets make sure that the location of ALL guns is known at all times.. Like planes in the sky..   Sound ok to you?   I mean if you want to make a comparison like that lets go for it.


----------



## Ameriscot (Apr 9, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> Don't forget the stats from 2001 - we lost over 3,000 people to just _four_ airplanes. Maybe we should make THOSE illegal as well ...



Yea, yea, and the ridiculous argument about how many die in traffic accidents so let's ban cars.


----------



## Ameriscot (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Guess what!!!    The NRA is not allowing loaded guns that their convention in Tennessee!!  AND the pin must be pulled...  It wouldn't be safe after all..  lol!!!  oh the Irony!!
> 
> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/07/1376216/-Gun-Control-at-NRA-Convention



I guess they don't trust their own members not to shoot each other.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

Ameriscot said:


> Yea, yea, and the ridiculous argument about how many die in traffic accidents so let's ban cars.



Exactly..... so to that I also say.... ok... of course we cannot ban cars... BUT let's regulate guns like we do cars then..


----------



## Ameriscot (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Exactly..... so to that I also say.... ok... of course we cannot ban cars... BUT let's regulate guns like we do cars then..



Yes.  And a mental health exam for anyone buying one.  And NO automatic weapons for anyone. The only purpose of those is to kill many people very quickly.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Guess what!!!    The NRA is not allowing loaded guns that their convention in Tennessee!!  AND the pin must be pulled...  It wouldn't be safe after all..  lol!!!  oh the Irony!!
> 
> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/07/1376216/-Gun-Control-at-NRA-Convention



Irony? That's pure hypocrisy!!


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Irony? That's pure hypocrisy!!



Goes to show ya...   lol!!


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

If that is the way the gun folks want their meetings, that ia pretty smart for their own safety.    There are plenty of folks running around in the US with unregistered guns, stolen guns, other weapons of choice, including bombs made by those that would kill in the US for various reasons.    I will give them credit for wanting to reduce the odds of some nuts wanting to come in to their meetings and create lots of death and destruction.


----------



## Shalimar (Apr 9, 2015)

OMG. Denial is a wonderful thing!


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

Why not take a good look at Chicago or New York City areas where gun laws are plenty and who bothers about the gun laws.   Only the law abiding citizens as the criminals really don't care.   They likely use unregistered or stolen weapons and after a crime they can just leave or toss their weapons without fear of being caught and charged.   I don't know what they numbers are but sure that crime rates are higher in those two places, one or the other is highest crime in the US.   Life in most of the US is free from any gun violence.   Hammers and knives will do well if guns are taken away and anger wishes to hurt someone.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> OMG. Denial is a wonderful thing!



:lofl:   Ain't it??


But I guess that when people want their children's schools.. and their local shopping center free of  unregistered guns, stolen guns, other weapons of choice, including bombs made by those that would kill kids and innocent people for various reasons.   We DON'T  give them credit for wanting to reduce the odds of some nuts wanting to come in and create lots of death and destruction


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

BobF said:


> If that is the way the gun folks want their meetings, that ia pretty smart for their own safety.    There are plenty of folks running around in the US with unregistered guns, stolen guns, other weapons of choice, including bombs made by those that would kill in the US for various reasons.    I will give them credit for wanting to reduce the odds of some nuts wanting to come in to their meetings and create lots of death and destruction.



Just wanted to make sure this gem was captured for posterity..


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 9, 2015)

BobF said:


> If that is the way the gun folks want their meetings, that ia pretty smart for their own safety.    There are plenty of folks running around in the US with unregistered guns, stolen guns, other weapons of choice, including bombs made by those that would kill in the US for various reasons.    I will give them credit for wanting to reduce the odds of some nuts wanting to come in to their meetings and create lots of death and destruction.



Exactly how I feel about places that I might frequent - shopping malls, cinemas, churches and schools.

On the other hand I would have been interested to see what might happen in a convention hall should one person start shooting and everyone else draw their weapons and starts shooting back. 

Of course, if what the NRA says is true, no-one would dare draw a gun with murder on their mind because everyone else would also be armed and consequently no-one would die. A would be mass murderer would simply choose a softer target, like a nearby police station or an army base where there would be less guns.

Did I get that right?


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

BobF said:


> Why not take a good look at Chicago or New York City areas where gun laws are plenty and who bothers about he gun laws.   Only the law abiding citizens as the criminals really don't care.   They likely use unregistered or stolen weapons and after a crime they can just leave or toss their weapons without fear of being caught and charged.   I don't know what they numbers are but sure that crime rates are higher in those two places, one or the other is highest crime in the US.   Life in most of the US is free from any gun violence.   Hammers and knives will do well if guns are taken away and anger wishes to hurt someone.




Here comes Fisherman Bob.... unpacking his crate of Red Herring.    Ok... I'll bite.. (pun intended)

So why not just do away with ALL laws?  I mean after all... criminals are only going to break them anyway..  Heck.. why bother?


----------



## Shalimar (Apr 9, 2015)

I think we should go back to days of the Roman coliseum games, where violence was contained, dressed up for the populace, and distracted everyone from the political and social ills around them. I wonder who we should round up first ?


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> I think we should go back to days of the Roman coliseum games, where violence was contained, dressed up for the populace, and distracted everyone from the political and social ills around them. I wonder who we should round up first ?




I've certainly got a few ideas... lol!!


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

Well, it is pretty obvious there are a bunch of non thinking, name calling, hateful folks on this forum.   I hope none of you dangerous folks ever get a gun.   You don't sound a bit trustworthy with something so dangerous.  True gun owners do understand what they own and why they do own them.    And they do what they can to make sure unnecessary problems do not happen.

Now those thugs and criminals don't worry about ownership or registrations so they often do use their guns with no mercy for anyone.   Why insist we all have to be gun free when it is mostly always those without records of ownership that do cause the problems.   How many bombs have registrations.    The questions just go on and on.   No answers either.


----------



## Shalimar (Apr 9, 2015)

I am a polite Canadian who would never call anyone names on any forum. Our constitution forbids it. If I am rude, Prime Minister Harper will make me live with his new best friend Bibi Netanyahu. yikes!


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 9, 2015)

I feel sorry for my ole pal Bob.  He doesn't know he's out gunned here.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> I feel sorry for my ole pal Bob.  He doesn't know he's out gunned here.



Pun intended I'm guessing...   :laugh:


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 9, 2015)

*wink


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

BobF said:


> Well, it is pretty obvious there are a bunch of*/] non thinking, name calling, hateful folks* on this forum.   I hope none of you *dangerous folks* ever get a gun.   You* don't sound a bit trustworthy with something so dangerous*.  True gun owners do understand what they own and why they do own them.    And they do what they can to make sure unnecessary problems do not happen.
> 
> Now those thugs and criminals don't worry about ownership or registrations so they often do use their guns with no mercy for anyone.   Why insist we all have to be gun free when it is mostly always those without records of ownership that do cause the problems.   How many bombs have registrations.    The questions just go on and on.   No answers either.



Correct me if I'm wrong Bob.... but................................isn't this name calling?


----------



## Shalimar (Apr 9, 2015)

Q.S. it's never name calling when you're right! Wink, wink!


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

:wink:


----------



## Davey Jones (Apr 9, 2015)

Complain to the NRA about this and they'll laugh right in your face.


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> I feel sorry for my ole pal Bob.  He doesn't know he's out gunned here.



Jim, I know I am out gunned here.   But they all need some challenge for their indiscriminate blaming of innocent gun owners.   It is not the ones that do own their guns that is the problem.   It is the criminal types that would never admit to owning a gun that are the problems.

Australia also has this same problem.   Many of their people own guns and are registered.   But gun crimes can still happen there too.   I guess I don't worry about that and wonder why folks from Australia worry about our gun situation.   Some one also rejected my comments about the Swiss being encouraged to own guns.   I wonder how it is that the Swiss encourage their folks to have guns.   In fact they have a weapon during their military years and then when they leave their military needs they get the opportunity to take ownership of a rifle from the government.   Not a snotty, hair brained government or population there.   The US should also go back a few, or many years, and recover that personal responsibility attitude once again and get away for this big brother knows all and all should abide by the central government ways.   The US was pretty good right up into the 1960's and 1970's but then started to go strange and want to copy the European style of government again.    Something that at one time we fought wars to get away from.   I think we have a lot of non thinking folks in charge these days.

Of course, my opinion, which normally is freely asked for.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

Davey Jones said:


> Complain to the NRA about this and they'll laugh right in your face.




Well of course they would..... They are always oblivious to their own hypocrisy...


----------



## Shalimar (Apr 9, 2015)

What exactly is the European style of government, Q.S.? In case Canada has been annexed without me realizing it....


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Well of course they would..... They are always oblivious to their own hypocrisy...



That is your opinion.   I also have an opinion.    NRA has opinions.   None are hypocrisy as you claim.   Just different ideas of what is right and wrong.    But according to the US laws, the NRA is being correct.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

BobF said:


> That is your opinion.   I also have an opinion.    NRA has opinions.   None are hypocrisy as you claim.   Just different ideas of what is right and wrong.    But according to the US laws, the NRA is being correct.



I'm amazed you don't feel that there is just a tad of hypocrisy involved when they want to ensure everyone's safety at their convention by not allowing loaded or operational weapons... but pitch a hissy fit when people would like to feel safe at school, church, shopping malls, theaters, etc.. by not allowing loaded or operational weapons..   You don't even see the teensiest, weensiest bit of hypocrisy there?


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> I'm amazed you don't feel that there is just a tad of hypocrisy involved when they want to ensure everyone's safety at their convention by not allowing loaded or operational weapons... but pitch a hissy fit when people would like to feel safe at school, church, shopping malls, theaters, etc.. by not allowing loaded or operational weapons..   You don't even see the teensiest, weensiest bit of hypocrisy there?



Not the least concerned as it is part of their job to try to get equality across the US.   Just as it is the local, state, and federal ways to try to get complete control over everyone they can.   You ideas about things are yours to keep and defend and it is everybody's right to defend their ideas, and that includes the NRA.    The NRA is trying to keep within the law and if they think local or regional laws are unfair, unconstitutional, they have a right to complain and try to get them changed.   Just as you and others, a minority I think,  can do the same.   If the battles get big enough then the Congress or the Supreme Court will step in and publish opinions.   Then the battles can start again based on those judgements.   That is what is great about the US Constitution, we all have a chance and a right to express our opinions legally.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

BobF said:


> Not the least concerned as it is part of their job to try to get equality across the US.   Just as it is the local, state, and federal ways to try to get complete control over everyone they can.   You ideas about things are yours to keep and defend and it is everybody's right to defend their ideas, and that includes the NRA.    The NRA is trying to keep within the law and if they think local or regional laws are unfair, unconstitutional, they have a right to complain and try to get them changed.   Just as you and others, a minority I think,  can do the same.   If the battles get big enough then the Congress or the Supreme Court will step in and publish opinions.   Then the battles can start again based on those judgements.   That is what is great about the US Constitution, we all have a chance and a right to express our opinions legally.




You didn't answer the question bob....   no hypocrisy in keeping the NRA convention gun free so to speak?


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Guess what!!!    The NRA is not allowing loaded guns that their convention in Tennessee!!  AND the pin must be pulled...  It wouldn't be safe after all..  lol!!!  oh the Irony!!



Are those the facts here...really?  http://www.examiner.com/article/press-social-media-blows-it-reporting-on-nra-working-gun-ban


"The New York Daily News and least one on-line writer appear to have revealed their ignorance yesterday about how big trade shows display firearms where thousands of people with varying skill levels will be handling them when the National Rifle Association meets in Nashville starting Friday.

The Daily News reported that “The NRA has banned working guns from its annual convention this year in Nashville, Tenn., according to a report in The Tennessean. 

Instead the group will require the thousands of firearms displayed at the event to be nonoperational, with their firing pins removed to ensure safety.” That's not the NRA's doing, actually, and at least the blogger noted above has added additional information to his column.

Those familiar with how gun companies display firearms, join together in a big “Well, DUH!” The NRA really didn’t “ban” anything.

 Instead, the association’s exhibits are following a tradition that applies equally to the much larger Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade (SHOT) Show, and has been the norm at NRA conventions for as long as anyone can remember.

Display firearms are _always_ disabled, and the gun companies do this.

As the quote above noted, firing pins are removed from these guns, whether a semi-auto shotgun, bolt-action rifle, pistols from Glock, Smith & Wesson, Kimber or Colt, and even reproduction single-action sixguns from various manufacturers.

 But this appears to be a clever media attempt to bash the NRA as some sort of hypocritical group that, the Daily News asserted, “wants guns at schools, but not its own annual convention.”

Instead, as Nashville Public Radio reported, the NRA is reminding its members that, “When carrying your firearm, remember to follow all federal, state and local laws.” Legally-carried firearms “are in the clear inside the Music City Center,” the radio report noted. However, across the street, at Bridgestone Arena, firearms are not allowed. The arena will be hosting “big nightly concerts,” the story says.

Bob Owens, over at Bearing Arms.com put it bluntly this morning, “There’s an old saying that, ‘A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.’ 

Presently, there is a bit of fiction sweeping through the media and left wing blogs pointing out supposed hypocrisy by the National Rifle Association.”

“It would be stunning hypocrisy,” Owens writes, “if the NRA was banning working guns, but it simply isn’t true…” 

And he twists the knife even harder with this gem: 

“The (NRA) holds an annual meeting every year in a different host city, and requires that attendees follow the federal, state and local laws applicable in that city, like every major convention of every significant national group, ever.”

In Phoenix a couple of years back, the annual NRA gathering looked like an armed camp. And yet every display firearm in the exhibit hall was incapable of being fired. Those guns couldn’t even shoot blanks, and neither, it appears, can the New York Daily News."


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> You didn't answer the question bob....   no hypocrisy in keeping the NRA convention gun free so to speak?



I did not think I missed anything but for your insisting.   The NRA is aware of the number of non NRA  folks running loose in this country that have no problems with bringing in guns, loaded and ready to fire, so they do the obvious thing, and ban weapons that may fire randomly or on purpose.   That is not hypocrisy at all, just awareness and prevention measures.
***************

And thank you SeeBreeze for you post above.   It is more specific than my response and there fore much better.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

To be fair....  I understand that the part of the convention where ALL the Republican Presidential hopefuls will be speaking,  will allow anyone to conceal and carry any sort of weapon they choose.   So that auditorium will be chock full of fire power...... and ALL the Republican Presidential hopefuls..   standing up in front....... speaking....  Let's hope no one decides to adjust the outcome of the upcoming race..   lol!!!


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> To be fair....  I understand that the part of the convention where ALL the Republican Presidential hopefuls will be speaking,  will allow anyone to conceal and carry any sort of weapon they choose.   So that auditorium will be chock full of fire power...... and ALL the Republican Presidential hopefuls..   standing up in front....... speaking....  Let's hope no one decides to adjust the outcome of the upcoming race..   lol!!!



Really a somewhat distorted post full of imagination for sure.    If you are talking about the coming NRA convention, it is only a few days away like tomorrow and thru the 15th of April.

There are only 2 Republican candidates committed so far.   Likely there will be no weapons allowed if they are there or not.   Best do some reading and less of these twisted posts.   Read the post above mine and you won't have much to fuss about.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

BobF said:


> Really a somewhat distorted post full of imagination for sure.    If you are talking about the coming NRA convention, it is only a few days away like tomorrow and thru the 15th of April.
> 
> There are only 2 Republican candidates committed so far.   Likely there will be no weapons allowed if they are there or not.   Best do some reading and less of these twisted posts.   Read the post above mine and you won't have much to fuss about.



Not sure why you insist on being so downright nasty Bob... But I guess that's just your personality. Also.. I would think you would know better by now..because you know I'm going to prove you wrong.   each and every time. 

Only two announced Bobby.... but lots of "Hopefuls"   and they will all be there, except Chris Christie and Rand Paul.. who were not invited.  




> Christie is one of only two big GOP names missing from the NRA's lineup, according to a report from The Tennessean. Christie, who was given a "C" rating by the NRA when he ran for re-election in 2013, was not invited.
> 
> We have a lengthy program and we have the longest list of potential presidential candidates to speak at the Leadership Forum this go-around, and we just could not accommodate everyone," Jennifer Baker, director of public affairs for the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action, told the newspaper.
> U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky), who announced his bid for the presidency on Tuesday, is the other GOP official who was not invited.
> ...




http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/04/no_nra_invitation_for_christie_to_speak_at_gun_gro.html


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

http://www.nraam.org/



> During the 2015 NRA Annual Meeting & Exhibits, lawfully carried firearms will be permitted in the Music City Center with the proper license in accordance with Tennessee law.  Bridgestone Arena prohibits the possession of firearms.  When carrying your firearm, remember to follow all federal, state and local laws.



So.,  no guns at the actual exhibits... BUT guns welcome at the Music City center.. where the candidates will be speaking...   Let's hope everyone stays on their meds.


----------



## SifuPhil (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Fair enough Phil....  But at least then we should regulate guns as stringently as we do air travel..  Strict rules for ownership like stringent licensing and proof ability to handle the weapon... Like a pilot needs..    Let's make sure that all gun owners carry a whopping big liability insurance policy to protect any one who is injured or killed by their gun..  Like airlines carry.   Lets make sure that the location of ALL guns is known at all times.. Like planes in the sky..   Sound ok to you?   I mean if you want to make a comparison like that lets go for it.



Gun ownership - LEGAL gun ownership - already has strict rules. Would I be in agreement with having to carry insurance? Perhaps - it depends upon how it's set up. 

The location of guns? What, stick an electronic tracer in them? If it's economically and technically feasible, I suppose so. Of course, you have to remember that sometimes they never recover the black boxes from airliners ...

But what I REALLY would want to be assured of is that the bad guys ALSO get registered and insured and trained and located ... give me a way to do that, show how they can be made to be equal to the law-abiding owners, and then I'll totally agree with you. Until then - no, sorry.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> Gun ownership - LEGAL gun ownership - already has strict rules. Would I be in agreement with having to carry insurance? Perhaps - it depends upon how it's set up.
> 
> The location of guns? What, stick an electronic tracer in them? If it's economically and technically feasible, I suppose so. Of course, you have to remember that sometimes they never recover the black boxes from airliners ...
> 
> But what I REALLY would want to be assured of is that the bad guys ALSO get registered and insured and trained and located ... give me a way to do that, show how they can be made to be equal to the law-abiding owners, and then I'll totally agree with you. Until then - no, sorry.



We have laws against murder... but still people are murdered.   We have laws against theft.. but people still steal.   we have laws against rape.. but rape still happens..   Do you believe it's the "law-abiding" citizens that are doing these things?   Or is it the criminals?    BY your logic, there shouldn't be any laws, because a certain factor is going to disobey them anyway..   It makes no sense... but is an effective Red Herring anytime gun control is discussed.


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> We have laws against murder... but still people are murdered.   We have laws against theft.. but people still steal.   we have laws against rape.. but rape still happens..   Do you believe it's the "law-abiding" citizens that are doing these things?   Or is it the criminals?    BY your logic, there shouldn't be any laws, because a certain factor is going to disobey them anyway..   It makes no sense... but is an effective Red Herring anytime gun control is discussed.



To me it is you that intends to mislead folks with plenty of distortions and political nonsense.  I asked you to read the following and it talks about the NRA shows.   To me it tells about disabled guns at the show.   Sounds good to me.   But certainly does not fill your power grabbing attitude about every thing.   You are so often wrong and when I say so you say I am mean.   Look into the mirror and see who is mean on this thread/forum.   I surrender, you are the champ.   A good example is your post above.  It makes no sense at all.

Keep on babbling oh greatest poster of the world, in your mind.   But read what is below.
.....................................


> *SeaBreeze*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

Oh little bobby.....  I have fun with you for a time, but you soon become tiring...  Problem solved...


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

It would help this forum if you did take a vacation.   A number of folks have told me they no longer post here because of types like you that think they know everything and everyone else that thinks different are bad.  It just is not true.   You know no more than others and other just have different readings and feelings from inputs.    You hate me?   It does not really matter as I have as much right as you for posting on this forum.


----------



## Shalimar (Apr 9, 2015)

What did I miss while I was not having fun at the wake? Are we fighting again? Man, Nobody hates anyone, we just often don't like each other's opinions. I live in a country that is anti-gun, anti-death penalty, but I don't hate people who feel differently. I do think they are wrong, but that is my prerogative. I am certain they feel the same about me.what is the problem with robust debate? It sharpens us all.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 9, 2015)

Same here Shalimar, and it escapes me how so many Americans can look at the statistics and compare them with the same stats from other countries and yet not see that they have a major problem. Arguments about individual rights are so esoteric in the face of so many deaths.

But I don't hate anyone. I do hate seeing children gunned down though whether it is happening in the US or in Somalia.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

I don't hate anyone... Just some of their opinions...  And I don't take it personally either..


----------



## Shalimar (Apr 9, 2015)

I wasn't referencing you, Q.S. There is a line you don't cross.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> I wasn't referencing you, Q.S. There is a line you don't cross.



What happened... I'm pretty generous with the ignore button...


----------



## Butterfly (Apr 9, 2015)

Lady K said:


> I definitely would walk away and also give a heads up to some type of management or security.



Yeah, but if it's legal, what can security do??


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Same here Shalimar, and it escapes me how so many Americans can look at the statistics and compare them with the same stats from other countries and yet not see that they have a major problem. Arguments about individual rights are so esoteric in the face of so many deaths.
> 
> But I don't hate anyone. I do hate seeing children gunned down though whether it is happening in the US or in Somalia.



An item you have missed Warrigal is that most of those gun problems are from criminal acts, drugs, crime fights, etc.   Most of the registered owners are not causing problems for the society at all.   Until our police folks are allowed to attack the problem straight out the bad guys will just continue to act out of line.   There should be no need to punish the legitimate owners for the bad guys ways of living.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 9, 2015)

BobF said:


> I guess I don't worry about that and wonder why folks from Australia worry about our gun situation.


Because the NRA, acting as agents for the arms and ammunition industry, are actively promoting gun ownership for the sake of gun ownership over here. This has never been part of our culture in any big way and most of us don't want it to go down that track.

Personally, and I've said this before, I cannot understand why nothing happens to impose sensible nationwide regulation on the sort of weapons that civilians can own, even after multiple massacres. After 9/11 America went to war and has been at war ever since. After Sandy Hook ?  Not very much at all.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Because the NRA, acting as agents for the arms and ammunition industry, are actively promoting gun ownership for the sake of gun ownership over here. This has never been part of our culture in any big way and most of us don't want it to go down that track.
> 
> Personally, and I've said this before, I cannot understand why nothing happens to impose sensible nationwide regulation on the sort of weapons that civilians can own, even after multiple massacres. After 9/11 America went to war and has been at war ever since. After Sandy Hook ?  Not very much at all.



Well of course they are..  They are looking to expand sales and increase profits for the gun and Ammo industries that fills their coffers.. Australia is seen as an untapped market..


----------



## mitchezz (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Well of course they are..  They are looking to expand sales and increase profits for the gun and Ammo industries that fills their coffers.. Australia is seen as an untapped market..



They're going to be sadly disappointed........I don't know one person here who would want a gun. We learnt our lesson after the Port Arthur Massacre. I am no fan of ex PM John Howard but I do thank him for his strong stance on the Gun Buy Back campaign.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 9, 2015)

Me too, Mitchezz. I even resolved to vote for him at the next election, but then came Tampa and I reneged.

Actually, I don't know one person who actually owns a gun.
However do we sleep soundly in our beds?


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 9, 2015)

mitchezz said:


> They're going to be sadly disappointed........I don't know one person here who would want a gun. We learnt our lesson after the Port Arthur Massacre. I am no fan of ex PM John Howard but I do thank him for his strong stance on the Gun Buy Back campaign.



Well, they will keep on trying... after all... just about every man, woman and child here in the States owns 14 guns... and a few bazookas.. (kidding)...  How else are they going to satisfy their puppetmaster with more sales?   We are pretty much saturated here..


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 9, 2015)

BobF said:


> An item you have missed Warrigal is that most of those gun problems are from criminal acts, drugs, crime fights, etc.   Most of the registered owners are not causing problems for the society at all.



That's very true Bob, most gun problems are from criminals, gangs and lately some mentally disturbed people who are under the influence of prescription medications for depression or anxiety, which have side effects of both homicide and suicide, as in the mass shootings.  The typical law abiding gun owner in the United States is not the problem in this society.


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Because the NRA, acting as agents for the arms and ammunition industry, are actively promoting gun ownership for the sake of gun ownership over here. This has never been part of our culture in any big way and most of us don't want it to go down that track.
> 
> Personally, and I've said this before, I cannot understand why nothing happens to impose sensible nationwide regulation on the sort of weapons that civilians can own, even after multiple massacres. After 9/11 America went to war and has been at war ever since. After Sandy Hook ?  Not very much at all.



Surprised to hear this Warrigal.   What happened to the Australian gun collecting drives they had some time back?    Would the Australian government actually allow an American gun group run things down there?   And contrary to a couple comments I have seen on this thread, I don't know how NRA gets any money from Australia.   Have they been chartered to operate in Australia?


----------



## BobF (Apr 9, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Because the NRA, acting as agents for the arms and ammunition industry, are actively promoting gun ownership for the sake of gun ownership over here. This has never been part of our culture in any big way and most of us don't want it to go down that track.
> 
> Personally, and I've said this before, I cannot understand why nothing happens to impose sensible nationwide regulation on the sort of weapons that civilians can own, even after multiple massacres. After 9/11 America went to war and has been at war ever since. After Sandy Hook ?  Not very much at all.



There have been efforts to control the types of guns sold.    Pretty hard to get all in the Congress to agree which and why.   So things get controlled and then that gets changed.   It is a wide open are for discussion and as long as the Constitution allows all to have guns, it will always be a mixed up setup.   I know a couple of weapon control items had been passed and that action was taken to the Supreme Court for decision on legality.   As I remember that particular item got returned to private ownership by the courts.


----------



## SifuPhil (Apr 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> We have laws against murder... but still people are murdered.   We have laws against theft.. but people still steal.   we have laws against rape.. but rape still happens..   Do you believe it's the "law-abiding" citizens that are doing these things?   Or is it the criminals?    *BY your logic, there shouldn't be any laws, because a certain factor is going to disobey them anyway*..   It makes no sense... but is an effective Red Herring anytime gun control is discussed.



No, by my logic there *should* be laws, laws that have some bite on _criminals_, not just bind up law-abiding citizens who want nothing more than to defend themselves. 

Do you honestly believe that law-breakers are going to follow any laws you pass?


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 10, 2015)

BobF said:


> Surprised to hear this Warrigal.   What happened to the Australian gun collecting drives they had some time back?    Would the Australian government actually allow an American gun group run things down there?   And contrary to a couple comments I have seen on this thread, I don't know how NRA gets any money from Australia.   Have they been chartered to operate in Australia?



The NRA doesn't run things but we do have  Shooters and Fishers Party that has managed to win a couple of seats in state parliaments. I wouldn't mind having a bet on where some of their political donations have come from. Their platform seems to be an importation too. 

At one stage the Shooters and Fishers held the balance of power in NSW and held the government to ransom demanding the end of marine and national parks as no fishing/no hunting areas.

For all I know they could be affiliated with the NRA but even if they aren't, they copy them. That's why the NRA and it's policies/behaviours is of interest to Australians like me who think shooting in National Parks where people hike and camp is inappropriate. Especially when 'people' includes groups of scouts and cubs and school kids on field trips.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 10, 2015)

Just stumbled across this lengthy article about a Senate inquiry into illegal firearms and gun violence in Australia.
 The inquiry has been hijacked by the gun lobby who deluged the inquiry with submissions and even had an American lobbyist appear via video link. I don't know his name but US members probably do.

http://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/...ck-senate-inquiry/14286744001744#.VShfWrkcQqQ


> *
> 
> US lobbyist appears
> *Another of Leyonhjelm’s (an Australian senator who is a libertarian) successes at the inquiry was the appearance of American gun lobby darling John Lott by teleconference. Leyonhjelm suggested that Lott be invited as a witness.
> ...



Do the tactics described in the article sound familiar? Is this an NRA tactic? I suspect they may be behind this ploy but don't really know.


----------



## koala (Apr 10, 2015)

Dame Warrigal, Australia has shown the world that guns are *not* a necessary part of life. I agree that Howard, a man I dislike by the way, did one great thing after Port Arthur by getting rid of a lot of arms out of the country.People would not need to protect themselves if arms of all description were removed.
However that is another story for other countries to deal with in their own way.


----------



## BobF (Apr 10, 2015)

Koala, you are correct.    There is a way to end gun ownership in the US quite legally.   It would only take a change of our Constitution which means the amendment for gun ownership would have to be changed or removed.   We have a procedure just for doing that to our Constitution.   It would require some strong actions in a major number of states and lots of support from lots of people all over the US to make that revision of the Constitution take place.   It could take a long time, years, to make it happen.   So there would only be long term action in order to get the job done.

There really is not much gained by all this local moaning and complaining about how the US handles guns.   It is already covered in our Constitution and the only fix would be to get the Congress to start working on the problem.   But with many of the Current Congress men and women liking the current gun rules, it would be hard to get started.   One person that has spoken out in favor of the current gun rules has been the leader of the Democrat Senate for many many years.   Harry Reid has often refused to even discuss messing with the Constitution about guns.

Maybe someday it might happen, but it is very doubtful.

Different states have their own way of handling the problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution

[h=1]List of amendments to the United States Constitution[/h] 						 									From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the complete list of the thirty-three *amendments to the United States Constitution* which have been adopted by the United States Congress and sent to the states for ratification since the Constitution  was put into operation on March 4, 1789. Twenty-seven of these, having  been ratified by the requisite number of states, are part of the  Constitution. The first ten amendments were adopted and ratified  simultaneously and are known collectively as the Bill of Rights.  Six amendments adopted by Congress and sent to the states have not been  ratified by the required number of states. Four of these amendments are  still technically open and pending, one is closed and has failed by its  own terms, and one is closed and has failed by the terms of the  resolution proposing it.
 Approximately 11,539 proposals to amend the Constitution have been introduced in Congress since 1789.[SUP][1][/SUP] Collectively, members of the House and Senate typically propose around 200 amendments during each two–year term of Congress.[SUP][2][/SUP] Most however, never get out of the Congressional committees  in which they were proposed, and only a fraction of those that do  receive enough support to win Congressional approval to actually go  through the constitutional ratification process.
 The framers  of the Constitution, recognizing the difference between regular  legislation and constitutional matters, intended that it be difficult to  change the Constitution; but not so difficult as to render it an  inflexible instrument of government. The amending process they devised,  codified in Article Five of the United States Constitution, has two steps. Proposals to amend the Constitution must be properly _Adopted_ and _Ratified_ before becoming operative.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 10, 2015)

I agree, Bob, that only the will of the American people will be able to make a difference to the carnage.
That will doesn't seem to be there and that is what puzzles me.


----------



## BobF (Apr 10, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I agree, Bob, that only the will of the American people will be able to make a difference to the carnage.
> That will doesn't seem to be there and that is what puzzles me.



For most of the people in the US, including the Democrats like Reid, it is the freedom of the people that is important.   The fewer restrictions by the government means more freedoms for the people.   

The problem is that far too many of the problem makers are not getting enough of the attention they deserve and most of that attention would end up in them being jailed.  Jail should be something they don't like such as hard work, education, no basketball courts, no short terms, hard discipline while in jails.   Sort of back to some of the older rules for dangerous folks.

Many of the young ones have no father to claim, that should be corrected technically and legally by medical tests and court judgements.   Far too many of those poor, low income folks, get grabs at groceries but not any encouragement to get educated.   Maybe we should restart the old orphans homes that were around when I was young.   My high school principal was a graduate from the orphans home where I lived.   It was like a small town.  Had a nice size cafeteria, medical section, a church, school facilities, and a number of nice size dorm cottages for the children and members of the community.  That was one very good way to control and educate such unwanted persons.   Too many of our modern ways of living are just pure nonsense and invitations to having bad results.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 10, 2015)

BobF said:


> Maybe we should restart the old orphans homes that were around when I was young.   My high school principal was a graduate from the orphans home where I lived.   It was like a small town.  Had a nice size cafeteria, medical section, a church, school facilities, and a number of nice size dorm cottages for the children and members of the community.


 Not to mention a generous serving of child abuse - physical, mental and ******. We're still in the middle of a Royal Commission into child ****** abuse in institutions such as schools, orphanages, even swim coaching schools. The Navy is also condemned as institutional abusers of young trainees. The evidence is appalling and the complainants are legion.

 IMO, orphanages are not the answer to the high rate of gun deaths in America. You need to look elsewhere for the cause and the solution.


----------



## koala (Apr 11, 2015)

mitchezz said:


> Thanks for the reassurances Drifter. I just don't understand the whole gun culture...if I had have had  a gun during my marriage I may well have been writing this from a gaol cell....too easy to pull a trigger. Life isn't perfect with gun control.....the crims still can get them and sometimes the police are too quick to shoot....but I think the majority of Australians are very happy they don't have guns.



*mitchezz*  	 you bet we are happy without a lot of guns down under.I hope your daughter is safe also.


----------



## BobF (Apr 11, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Not to mention a generous serving of child abuse - physical, mental and ******. We're still in the middle of a Royal Commission into child ****** abuse in institutions such as schools, orphanages, even swim coaching schools. The Navy is also condemned as institutional abusers of young trainees. The evidence is appalling and the complainants are legion.
> 
> IMO, orphanages are not the answer to the high rate of gun deaths in America. You need to look elsewhere for the cause and the solution.



Sorry, but I don't believe that was why the US dropped the orphan homes at all.   I used my school principle to try to avoid this crime nonsense and show real success.   Obvious that the homes had a reasonable cross section of mentalities and mind sets and there would be some problem makers as in regular family settings.   But in those older times there was less of this do not punish mentality and trouble makers did get punished with reduced freedoms, whatever.   Things that nobody seems to want done anymore.

As a adventurous kid I did get called into the police station for something.   I got a lot of fear pumped into me by the chief of police.  I was scared a plenty but never hit or jailed.   Shouting was good enough for me.   Another friend of my neighbor hood and his buddy got caught in the city park pushing concrete picnic benches down the hill. teen age smart jerks.   The police caught them and they had to push those benches back up the hill into their proper places.   It was a long day for them but saved the city the cost of hiring someone to do the job for them.

Child abuse?   Not at all.   Punishment by hard work and correcting the problem they created, with lots of shouting at them about ever getting caught in trouble again.   It worked quite well.

We have come to far away from fixing problems and turning everything over to courts and attorneys in the US.   We now seem to think that wasting our money on such means of correcting that mostly the ones with money can get away with even murder.   We really need to change the way we do things in the US.

Australia can do as they please.


----------



## rt3 (Apr 21, 2015)

TWHRider said:


> Since that type of thing is legal in Utah, it could also be his "rough-tough-stupid-male-ego" that is front and center.
> 
> Either way, it's moronic, IMO.  I was raised with guns; walking around a mall with one slung over the shoulder is not cute.  It's a perfect example of taking the Second Amendment waaaaay out of context; this is not the wild west days of old.
> 
> ...



time to update this thread. 
Your comment could be construed easily as a physical threat, but if your dumb enough to take a knife to a gun fight......


----------



## rt3 (Apr 21, 2015)

That Guy said:


> After posting above, I thought all day and night about the tough job cops have.  They deal with the dregs of society on a daily basis and most are truly doing the best we can expect.  BUT (and a huge butt it is . . .)  There are too many "cowboys" on a power trip, jacked up on adrenaline.  Have had my share of encounters with the good, the bad and the ugly and would rather avoid them at all cost.
> 
> Speaking of innocent people being shot by cops . . .    I think the latest "fad" is innocent people being shot by stand-your-grounders who get away with it!



Innocent of what? Guilty of what? Your not up on your stats.


----------



## rt3 (Apr 21, 2015)

Looks like QS had foot in mouth disease again mixing up the display guns with the private ones, oh well did a good job at changing the topic though.

update on the Utah open carry.

this Friday Texas will join the states that allow open carry, with a few changes, but first some back ground

currently anti gun freaks, such as Bloombergs Everytown and Moms against guns, have been engaging in practice called "swatting". When they see an open carry they have been calling in to police dispatcher "man with gun" or like a recent case at a Walmart taking the situation into their own hands and tackling the guy. In the south a man was showing a pellet gun to his son at the sporting goods counter when one of these calls was made and was shot dead by the police. Of course a wrongful death suit was filed a subpoena produced the name of the caller, who is dening they made the call because of membership in one of the groups. I doubt if the person will have their shoelaces left after legal costs etc. 
some towns and city police get around the open carry by arresting the open carrys for disturbing the peace charge. Some states such as Utah have stste laws which specifically block local police from using this charge.
texas goes one further by criminalizing "swatting" which I think will be made a felony. In any case civil action is always open to any open carry who has been victimized by do gooders. So before you jump into what you think are your rights concerning guns on either side it will take some research on your part. Of course you could just key board commando it like most folks here.

almost forgot- for the folks that like to refer to gun etc, in terms of anal complexs, locked in the oral stage, etc, look deep into your own Oedipus complex.


----------



## Shalimar (Apr 21, 2015)

Rt, why so much contempt towards those who do not share your world view? You are a highly educated man, certainly you must be aware of the principles of debate.


----------



## rt3 (Apr 21, 2015)

Mostly educated in errors in logic, mathematics, fallacies thereof, not a contempt for world anything-- except when it interferes with my freedoms especially constitutional, that draws the line. If your not on this side of the second, you are on the other, just keep your hands were I can see them --


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 21, 2015)

rt3 said:


> Mostly educated in errors in logic, mathematics, fallacies thereof, not a contempt for world anything-- except when it interferes with my freedoms especially constitutional, that draws the line. If your not on this side of the second, you are on the other, just keep your hands were I can see them --



My dad had a neat little term for some folks, "Educated fools".


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 21, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> My dad had a neat little term for some folks, "Educated fools".



My dad had a neat little term too... only it pertained to part of one's anatomy stuck up another part.    However, I think some people can be really book smart, but people stupid... kwim?


----------



## rt3 (Apr 21, 2015)

Funny thing about opinions, they are like body parts, everybody has at least one, and some of them don't work all the time


----------



## rt3 (Apr 21, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> My dad had a neat little term too... only it pertained to part of one's anatomy stuck up another part.    However, I think some people can be really book smart, but people stupid... kwim?



Amazing, my dad had the same saying, must have been the era. However his went a little further  " and when it closes off all the other body parts quit" I would look up at him say, so who is the laxative?  Mom?
god I love homilies -


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 21, 2015)

rt3 said:


> Funny thing about opinions, they are like body parts, everybody has at least one, and some of them don't work all the time




I would suggest in your case, it's above the eyes, but the mouth works fine.


----------



## rt3 (Apr 21, 2015)

Aw Jim cat got your tongues.


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 21, 2015)

nwc  (not worthy of comment).


----------

