Autopia Forums - Auto Detailing & Car Care Discussion Forum
Go Back   Autopia Forums - Auto Detailing & Car Care Discussion Forum > Autopia Forums Members Club > Off Topic
Off Topic For posts that aren't detailing or car care related, we present Off Topic. Please keep it family friendly. Detail City rules of conduct still apply in Off Topic

» Car Care Brands
View Poll Results: Do you carry a firearm?
No - Firearms are evil. 8 14.29%
No - but I do have some sort of firearm in the house. 24 42.86%
Yes - but only in the car. 4 7.14%
Yes - if you see me, chances are I am packing. 20 35.71%
Voters: 56. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  (#16) Old
Founder Poorboy's World
Poorboy Can Make Rust ShinePoorboy Can Make Rust ShinePoorboy Can Make Rust ShinePoorboy Can Make Rust ShinePoorboy Can Make Rust ShinePoorboy Can Make Rust ShinePoorboy Can Make Rust ShinePoorboy Can Make Rust ShinePoorboy Can Make Rust ShinePoorboy Can Make Rust ShinePoorboy Can Make Rust Shine
 
Poorboy's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-02-2008, 08:26 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by black bart View Post
Huge difference in location.
Exactly When I lived in AZ carrying a side arm was an everyday ocurance and there were a few incidences but not that many considering the amount of hand guns, but in NY if you see one and it's not on a cop, you know trouble is near


life is short ..do it while you can

e-mail .. poorboy@poorboysworld.com
   
Reply With Quote
  (#17) Old
black bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shine
 
black bart's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-02-2008, 08:32 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bert View Post

YouTube - The Truth about Firearms


Theoretically why can't it be - Fully Automatic - Illegal; Semi Automatic, Bolt Action, Lever Action, Pump, Single Shot and other none Fully Automatic Weapons - Legal.
Because Congress don't know what they are doing.

Best description of a congressman was a cartoon I saw of a guy sitting on the toilet and the caption
read THIS IS THE ONLY ONE IN WASHINGTON THAT KNOWS WHAT HE IS DOING.
   
Reply With Quote
  (#18) Old
black bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shine
 
black bart's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-02-2008, 09:03 PM

A Black Cops view of the seccond amendment




Re: Guns and Violence Today
I know that many don't have the time to read this and that many also would not agree with this view. I however found it to be a very good read.


Honor, racism, service rifles and assault weapons: One black cop's view

October 6th, 2007
by Henry "Snake" Bowman

"Well, you Sons of xxxxxes, now you know how I feel!"
-General George S. Patton

You may not like what I'm going to say here, but the First Amendment is still in effect (at the time
of the time of this writing) so I'm going to exercise my right to rant: Prepare to get your feathers
ruffled!

If you are a uniformed Police Officer of any rank and do not fully, and honorably support the
pre-existing God given rights enumerated in the 2nd Amendment, you are a disgrace to your Badge and
your oath of office to protect and serve. The citizens of the United States of America deserve
better than you. You should not be allowed the honor of public service as a sworn peace officer of
the law. Taking a contrary, selective position to the Constitution means you are not following the
supreme law of the land and are, in fact, endangering the safety of yourself, your fellow officers,
and the public you are sworn to protect. This dishonor is increased if you support any (so- called)
"Police Fraternal Organization" that aligns itself with groups seeking to infringe, limit, or
destroy the 2nd Amendment (Such as "Handgun Control Incorporated," etc). This dishonor is increased
if you support any State or Federal Attorney General, Legislator (Politician); or local Government
body that have de facto reneged on their sworn oath to "Protect and defend the Constitution against
all enemies, foreign or domestic." For these individuals (by endorsing "gun control") have become
the "domestic enemies" embodied in that oath.

If this description fits you, know that I consider you to have no honor and should rightly be held
beneath contempt for your nauseous subservience to an unconstitutional doctrine, plus unheroic
behavior in the face of danger to your fellow officers and the public.

Are you ticked off yet? Well, refer to the above quote by U.S. Army General George S Patton. Read
it? Good, that means I can only add, (if you were offended): "tough noogies!" Let's proceed.

There is plenty of documentation to support the fact that "gun control" laws in the United States
are and have been rooted in the dishonorable practice generally known as "Racism." If there is any
doubt about this? I suggest you do some research on your own (Author Clayton E. Cramer has written a
short essay that can bring you up to speed quickly, search it out.)

This brings me to a further assertion. I submit that if you wear the badge and happen to be of Black
ancestry ("African-American" is the current "politically correct" term: I choose not to use it), and
fit the criteria I have previously described, you should be held in special dishonor. Your ancestors
fought and died under a special adversity for the rights you presently enjoy. I know that we still
have a long way to go, (and you are unhappy with that last promotion you were "suspiciously" beaten
out of). But today you are still freer than any previous generation, and should honor what they
fought for by at least acknowledging that fact. A Black officer or group of officers that support
"gun control" over the 2nd Amendment, in effect, support a continuation of practices rooted in
racism, practices that currently discriminate against a targeted group of Americans not limited only
to Blacks. If you support that you have no honor and are a disgrace to your badge, your brothers in
blue, your brothers in ancestry, and the public you are sworn to protect and serve. (This goes for
the rest of you who seek not to be identified as "Black," but are not, so-called, "white;" so for
you "others," accept that you have advanced in large part on the corpses of millions of Black
Americans who were here before you: It's a fact: Deal with it.)

Are you ticked off yet? Are you calling me bad names? Does the truth hurt? Good, maybe you'll grow a
spine and renounce this "thing" called "gun control" and fight for all your rights! (Refer to the
Patton quote again here.)

(By the way, Patton lauded his Black tanker / tank destroyer units who fought under his command.
Patton said words to the effect of him not giving a damn what color a man was as long as he had the
balls to fight the enemy.How are yours hangin', Lawman?)

Fact: "Gun Control" is a betrayal of the people you are sworn to protect. "Gun Control" deprives
only the law-abiding citizen the best means of self-defense against the violent criminal element.
Remember those people? Those you are sworn to protect? And what about those "other" people? You know
them well, you have to deal with them on the street nearly every day. You know what mindless
savagery they are capable of, you have seen the result first hand. You know they have no conscience.
You know that most are sociopathic, and rationalize that the rules don't apply to them, just the
"chumps" stupid enough to work for a living and obey "the law" 99% of the time. You know they are
cowards who enjoy harming the weak and defenseless; who in fact take a vicious glee in the suffering
of their victims. You know there is a reason we need prisons. You know this from "up close and
personal" experience the protected rarely grasps: They are taken aback by the naked face of evil,
flee from it. They pray that you might arrive in time to save them from it (Except, of course, from
the self-reliant gun-owning citizens "allowed" to defend themselves in pro-self defense
jurisdictions). But you, Lawman, ideally should be a warrior/philosopher. You run toward the sound
of battle, rather than from it. You are charged with righting wrong, sworn to do so even at risk of
your life. You know the badge is more than mere metal.

That being the case, to advocate citizens offer themselves up as sheep-like prey, to advocate the
best citizens, the level-headed, able to help their fellows in your absence, those who are your
support, those whose firearms will NEVER be turned against YOU, is unconscionable, unreasonable, and
unrealistic!

That citizen could well save your life some day. It has happened in the past countless times, what
makes you think it cannot happen again? Well, it will not happen if that citizen is (un-
constitutionally) disarmed. That citizen, (in actuality, that member of the Unorganized Militia of
the United States of America, constitutionally protected to keep and bear arms), is there to help.
If you have had to deputize a citizen while alone and struggling with a resisting suspect, you know
what I mean! (Why do you think you have the power to deputize in the first place? Think about it,
Lawman).

Understand this concept: Criminals misuse firearms in violent crime, law-abiding citizens DON'T. The
mere fact that one is willing to misuse a firearm against his fellows automatically brands them an
evil-doer, unfit to share the company of non-violent citizens: Their intent and action (Human
responsible agency) defines them as violent criminals, mere possession of firearms does not. Never
confuse the two.Remember there is a faction whose intent is specifically designed to deceive you
into equating mere possession of firearms with evil intent: Never fall for this sophistical gambit,
don't be a gullible fool, manipulated by emotionalist propaganda. Use your mind and logic to see
through the hype.

To advocate this "thing," this "gun control," is the highest betrayal of the primary rule of nature:
self-defense. It is a cruel betrayal of the people you are sworn to protect, and a boon to the
evildoers among us. It is the ultimate betrayal of your hard-earned Badge and all it stands for.

Are you ticked off yet? Are you calling me "crazy" because you have been fed propaganda claiming
citizens "can't be trusted with guns?" Has it occurred to you that all citizens are not violent
criminals? That "cause and effect" do not support the flawed theory that armed citizens cause crime?
That it is illogical to "tar the citizen with the same brush" as the violent predators among us?

Well, know this: the advocates of this despicable thing called "gun control" do not bother to make
these distinctions! Their mentality proves it, and the intentional criminalization of millions of
American citizens at their hands, through the "banning" of mythical so-called "Assault Weapons,"
handguns, and other infringements, proves that "crime control," despite their claims, is not their
true agenda.

After all, why would politicians intentionally create a new class of "criminals" from a population
that has not engaged in any violent acts? In some jurisdictions, California comes to mind, Police
Officers, assumed to be trusted to carry firearms in the defense of the public; are not exempted
from these "assault weapons" bans, on or off-duty. Think about that, Lawman, What message is that
sending you? What about "Officer Safety?" (Particularly in the wake of the North Hollywood
shootout, where Cops had to go begging to local gun shops to borrow "illegal assault weapons" to
stop terrorist bank robbers?). They are denying you safety, and survival, and by extension, also the
public.

How are you being seen by those who seek to ban any firearms that can be demonized to suit arbitrary
political whims, such as "(Niggertown) Saturday Night Specials," ".50 Caliber Sniper Rifles," or the
current obfuscation craze, the alleged "deadly, high powered semi-automatic weapon" aka "Assault
Weapons?"
(President "Teddy" Roosevelt would have been confused about that one: He routinely carried
"semi-autos" on his hunts, and this was in the early 19th Century! "Semi-Auto" Technology is nothing
"new," despite newsroom propaganda).

Realize that even you are now a suspect, viewed as a "latent criminal" by the very people that claim
to be "pro-law enforcement," and tell the public that you support their views! This concept is what
the Communists called "useful idiots," human tools to further a totalitarian agenda. If you think
they are your "friends," I beg you to look at the facts and realize that anyone who seeks to deny
your self-preservation is not your friend! Period!

Anyone who seeks to deny American citizens the ability for self- preservation is not a friend
either: The two go hand in hand: the protectors and those they are charged to protect.And over what?
Simple possession of a legally purchased firearm that is no different from any other of its class
except by its "appearance?"

Orchestrated brainwash: Propaganda techniques and The Mythical "Assault Weapon"

Anyone but an abject moron or gullible dupe can deny certain obvious facts regarding firearms. .
Several well-researched articles have been written supporting the facts about "semi-automatic"
firearms. For brevity, I will assert 2 basic facts important to understand when attempting to figure
out how we got to this point in history.

Fact 1) Propaganda techniques developed by the Nazis and Communists are not dead: It is easy for one
to dismiss facts by claiming a "right wing" bias against "progressive" (Socialist) ideas. That's a
game for fools. Advocates of "gun control" unashamedly use emotionalistic ploys a to gather cash,
sympathy, and "useful idiots," to further their agenda. Accept that these people are more than
willing to LIE without conscience to further their agenda. Have no illusions about it. Furthermore..

Fact-2) The "Mainstream Media" and University environments are controlled by Socialist "political
correctness": One cannot rely upon these sources, in the main, to be objective or
"pro-constitution." The "Lamestream Media" are the epitome of "useful idiots." Their news organs
are run by 60's Marxist influenced cadre who use our "freedom of speech" against us (As predicted by
Soviet Cold Warrior Nikita "We will bury you" and "We will take over your society without firing a
shot," Khrushchev.) University "Professors" happily brainwash your kids with discredited Marxist
rhetoric.They "love" the 1st Amendment, but see the rest of the Constitution as merely a hindrance
to be negated as soon as possible, particularly the 2nd Amendment. As elite "intellectuals" they
ignore the fact that they would be first against the firing squad wall in the Utopian "revolution"
they dream of.

(In the Congo revolution of the 1960's, people were shot out of hand merely for having the intellect
to ride a bicycle!) Both elements are anti-firearms (in the hands of the untrustworthy "masses" at
least) by philosophy. Ironically their "supporters" would quickly "put them against the wall" after
they are no longer "useful idiots." These fools would graduate to being "dead idiots" and initiators
of a Police state, rather than a "Utopia." This has happened countless times in history, yet they
never accept this fact.

Summary: "Gun Control" advocates consistently use the above indicated techniques, are shameless
liars, and have no compunction to use "any means necessary" to disarm Americans.They are in fact
elitists who look down on the "masses" being armed and care nothing for your safety. They hate the
Police as "tools of the oppressors" (i.e.: not under their control), and all they stand for. They
"tolerate" guns only to assure their self-preservation (Your self- preservation does not count, they
see you only as fit to be nameless victims on TV news bytes. This applies to both Police and
citizens!)

Lies and dammed lies: The Mythical "Assault Weapon"

If you have stuck with me this far, it likely means you know something about firearms so I can cut
to the chase and get down to business. Keeping the previous facts in mind, other facts appear that
we already know, such as.

There is no honor in dishonor: We are not "useful idiots," cowardly by nature and easily manipulated
by fear tactics. We know that a cruel "magic trick" has been cynically perpetrated on the people of
the USA, and continues to be at the time of this writing. We know that the politicians, their
"running dogs" (to borrow a Communist propaganda term) in the news media, and sadly, the "useful
idiots" who carry a badge and align themselves with these elements for personal gain and power.
These are primarily Police Chiefs/Sheriffs and "Fraternal Organizations," who claim to represent the
true street cops, but have long ago lost touch with the street and the officers who daily are on the
line.

These dishonorable individuals are a disgrace to the Badge for their craven contempt of officer and
civilian safety by condoning firearm confiscation, this "thing" called "gun control." We know this
axis are liars, dammed liars, and continue to be liars! We know, however, that they have had success
with their dammed lies! Fact:

There is no such thing as an "Assault Weapon": We know that the firearms that have been demonized as
so-called "Assault Weapons" are no more dangerous than any other common rifle. We know that these
firearms were discriminated against simply because they look similar to current military firearms.
We know that looks are totally irrelevant to function. We know that many of these targeted firearms
are in fact less lethal than most common firearms, because the ammunition is of lower power. We know
that the propagandists misused the German term "Sturmgewer" ("Assault Rifle"), a firearm by
definition a "machine gun" or "full-automatic" rifle, and xxxxxxxized the term into "Assault
Weapon." Then, using the "Big Lie" technique (itself pioneered by Nazi master propagandist Josef
Goebbels) by substituting the term "Assault Weapon" for "semi-automatic" or "self- loading" rifles.
The latest definitional "bait and switch" buzzword is to refer to any self-loading firearms, rifle
or pistol, as so- called scary "Semi-Automatic weapons." This latest variation on the theme serves
the same purpose as the original: Create confusion and reactionary fear in the populace to further a
gun confiscation agenda, plus stigmatize any law-abiding citizen who would choose to own such a
military look alike firearm! The idea is to discredit the gun owner, force them to appear to be
"unreasonable," and thereby justify "more reasonable controls" on firearms. Remember their overused
talking point? "Why would anyone need an "assault weapon?" (A lawyer must have thought up that bit
of "are you still beating your wife" rhetoric!) This "Divide and Conquer" tactic worked quite well,
and all gun owners who fell into that trap should be ashamed of themselves. From the blackpowder
shooters up and through the .50 Cal Geeks, we should never again allow ourselves to be divided this
way! If you remember nothing from this essay, remember this point!)

After all, one can buy a 150mph capable Ferrari, but only "needs" a VW Bug: Quick! Justify that
argument to yourself right now. What other logical arguments should you have come up with when some
brainwashed anti gun do-gooder got in your face with this type of propaganda? How will you fare in
similar situations in future?

Military look-alikes are "more" Constitutionally protected than others: They are true "Militia
Rifles! This fact points to the actual reason why these firearms are demonized and "banned!" Did it
ever occur to you, Lawman, why the anti-gun fanatics chose to "ban" these mythical firearms rather
than seek to "control" them by using the same system already in place for "machine guns?" Think
about it. Hard! Scenarios can range from the simple (Semi-Auto technology could not stand the
objective test to compare them to actual machineguns, therefore the gun-banners had to consider they
might lose using such a tactic) to the full- on "nightmare" (Gun banning politicians looking outside
their office windows to see thousands of citizens of all races and creeds gathered together, each
thrusting their AR-15's, AK-47's and FAL rifles overhead, chanting in unison "Don't tread on me!"
"Never Again!" and "fill in the blank!"). [What scenario(s) do you think explain "banning" vs.
"control?"].

The modern Militia Rifle is no different from the personally supplied musket, powder and ball of our
ancestors: state of the art civilian versions of military firearms, as the founding fathers
intended. The Swiss have long known this simple concept, and their unorganized Militia possesses
government issued (actual) Assault Rifles and other small arms in most homes. Their politicians
appear to have no problem trusting the people with arms. Here, in the USA, politicians intentionally
conspire to deprive the people of arms, and have specifically targeted those arms that have the most
utility as Militia firearms. Can we see the forest for the trees? I'm going to say it, because is
seems nobody else has the "stones" to "tell it like it is," so prepare again to get your feathers
ruffled! Our first and best President, George Washington, hit the nail on the head when he called
Militia Rifles our "liberty teeth!"

Do you really think the gun-ban fanatics don't know the real significance of widespread ownership of
Militia Rifles? Do you really think they suddenly decided that these firearms should be "banned"
because a few isolated madmen (criminals) decided to commit "suicide by Cop," turning the gun on
their fellows, with the resultant, orchestrated, high profile media coverage?

(A tactic used to "justify" gun bans in Canada, Australia, and the U.K. to name a few.Countries who
now have a nearly out of control "illegal firearms" crime rates? Don't forget that their governments
declared the firearms to be illegal in the first place, yet decry so-called "illegal firearms use.")
George Washington had recent memory of the events that sparked the Revolutionary War against the
Crown, events that are not taught to our children, glossed over, or outright lied about in
classrooms all over the USA. The simple fact is that the revolt was sparked by British troops
attempting to confiscate the arms and ammunition of American colonists! Our ancestors called those
that would deprive the people of arms as tyrants seeking to crush liberty. So I ask you, what are we
to call those who seek to do the same thing here and now? Remember what I said about those who would
deprive you of your right to defend yourself not being your friends, Lawman? What about your officer
safety and the safety of those you are sworn to protect? (One cannot "pursue happiness" if one is
dead, after all). What do we call those who today are relentlessly determined to confiscate, declare
"illegal," and "ban" firearms, particularly those most suited to be Americans "liberty teeth?" Those
who are doing the same thing as those British troops of yore, (by "legal" means): attempting to
confiscate the arms and ammunition of Americans? Say it, Dammit!

The bottom line: Telling it like it is, and Deal with it! The constant spiteful attacks, slander,
demonization and ridicule of law-abiding gun owners over the years are taking their toll. The
peaceful citizens of the "gun culture" are fast reaching their limit of how much abuse they are
going to take. They are fed up with being compared to violent criminals, because they know they are
not.

They rightly resent, and are fearful of being turned into "instant felons," merely because a firearm
has some innocuous feature they know has no realistic bearing on its function. These execrable
"laws" are already on the books, and the citizens, terrorized by State propaganda, know they are in
jeopardy, backed into a corner. You know what happens when you have to deal with the proverbial
"cornered animal?" And realize this: No politician will suffer because of these "laws", if anything,
they will exploit the results of the "enforcement" of these "laws," and what will that be, Lawman?
You or your fellows being killed by the dozens attempting to serve warrants on "technical violators"
(that guy with a "flashhider," "detachable magazine" or "bayonet lug" on his legally bought firearm?
All because some cowardly "Supervisor" thought it would be an "easy arrest", as the "violator" is
not a known violent felon? That is the bottom line: You have been put in the "trick bag," Lawman!
They pass the phony unconstitutional "gun laws," but you, Lawman, are the first to DIE "enforcing"
them!

These citizens are not stupid, they instinctively know these "laws" are wrong. You know that these
laws are wrong also, Lawman, and what you see on the street every workday proves it over and over
again. I know because I see it every workday myself. Again, I say Criminals misuse firearms in
violent crime, law- abiding citizens do not! I have never seen or heard of anyone injured or killed
by a "folding stock" or a "30 round magazine." I have seen people injured by the "human responsible
agency" of another person, using "weapons" from fist to automobile.

By standing against the lie embodied in this unnatural anti-self defense concept of "gun control,"
you are making the ultimate statement to truth, justice, integrity and honor. You are assuring that
the Police in America will not go down the same path as the Politzei of the Nazi era, passively
participating in the oppression of those citizens disfavored by the current government. (James
Madison: "Americans [having] the right and advantage of being armed- unlike citizens of other
countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.")

We are Americans and our traditions make us unique. We must, as officers of the law, protect and
serve
the citizenry, enabling them to "pursue happiness" as best possible. Your Badge should only reflect
the bright light of liberty and never embrace the dark side of evil: the poisonous, insidious,
despicable, doctrine of gun confiscation. There is no higher evil than to deprive the citizens of
the United States their right to individual, collective, and national defense against those who
would harm them without mercy. Stand against this horrific crime. Prevent the consequences,
intentional or not. The gun-confiscators are creating a move from "the ballot box to the cartridge
box." Only your sacred Badge and all it stands for will prevent it, and this you have sworn to do
Lawman!

Well, you Sons of xxxxxes really know how I feel now!
   
Reply With Quote
  (#19) Old
Just One More Coat
Beemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust Shine
 
Beemerboy's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-02-2008, 11:10 PM

Anyone that is carrying a HG other than law enforcement in public...makes me nervious...IMO...carring a gun you are doing so for protection...I don't know of any Joe public that has the training to use one in public...that part makes me nervous...I do't have any issues with people owning guns, as long as they are used in areas that are not in the general public area...nothing good can come of that in most cases


Old Enough To Know Better, Too Stupid To Care....

Dave's Detailing
Sonoma County, CA
   
Reply With Quote
  (#20) Old
black bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shine
 
black bart's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-02-2008, 11:22 PM

Liberals always seem to like gun control.

My definition of Gun Control is being able to hit your target.

I have competed in shooting contest and have beat several cops, but since I'm not an officer I should not be allowed to carry .
   
Reply With Quote
  (#21) Old
Just One More Coat
Beemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust Shine
 
Beemerboy's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-02-2008, 11:34 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by black bart View Post
Liberals always seem to like gun control.

My definition of Gun Control is being able to hit your target.

I have competed in shooting contest and have beat several cops, but since I'm not an officer I should not be allowed to carry .
BB....I'm not talking about if you can shoot off the butt off a house hold fly at 300 yards....I'm talking about the average person that is caring a gun in public...that has no training as to how to use it in public...law enforcement has that...are they the best shots in every case? no but they are trained to use the gun in pubic and be aware of what is around them.


my question more so for you is...why do you want to carry a gun in public?


Old Enough To Know Better, Too Stupid To Care....

Dave's Detailing
Sonoma County, CA
   
Reply With Quote
  (#22) Old
COME AT ME BRO
JaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust Shine
 
JaredPointer's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-02-2008, 11:42 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemerboy View Post

my question more so for you is...why do you want to carry a gun in public?
Because I can't carry a police officer...


I don't believe in grit guards.
   
Reply With Quote
  (#23) Old
SuperDuper Moderator
GearHead_1 Can Make Rust ShineGearHead_1 Can Make Rust ShineGearHead_1 Can Make Rust ShineGearHead_1 Can Make Rust ShineGearHead_1 Can Make Rust ShineGearHead_1 Can Make Rust ShineGearHead_1 Can Make Rust ShineGearHead_1 Can Make Rust ShineGearHead_1 Can Make Rust ShineGearHead_1 Can Make Rust ShineGearHead_1 Can Make Rust Shine
 
GearHead_1's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-02-2008, 11:54 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemerboy View Post
my question more so for you is...why do you want to carry a gun in public?
I choose to exercise this right. I carry, simply because I can. I for one have had hundreds of hours of training in various disciplines including sizing up and handling a crowd safely.


ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Liberty is ours to lose. Stand tall, stand firm, stand together!
   
Reply With Quote
  (#24) Old
Just One More Coat
Beemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust Shine
 
Beemerboy's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-02-2008, 11:55 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by JaredPointer View Post
Because I can't carry a police officer...
I was asking BB...but thanks

JP...so you are telling me that you would use this HG...if you felt threatened?

At what point do you make that decision that you are threatened? what constitutes that?

And what happens when you use the gun for its intended purpose and shoot someone?

I would not want to be a person trying to prove self defense in a court of law in this country.


Old Enough To Know Better, Too Stupid To Care....

Dave's Detailing
Sonoma County, CA
   
Reply With Quote
  (#25) Old
Just One More Coat
Beemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust Shine
 
Beemerboy's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-03-2008, 12:01 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by GearHead_1 View Post
I choose to exercise this right. I carry, simply because I can. I for one have had hundreds of hours of training in various disciplines including sizing and handling a crowd safely.
GH...your of the minority of gun carriers..IMO...I don't have hard numbers to post on this but I would be willing to believe that most gun owners...practice at shooting for accuracy..competitions, hunting, etc.....but do not have the training of skill sets that it takes to use in a public setting...for self defense.


Old Enough To Know Better, Too Stupid To Care....

Dave's Detailing
Sonoma County, CA
   
Reply With Quote
  (#26) Old
COME AT ME BRO
JaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust Shine
 
JaredPointer's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-03-2008, 12:08 AM

Well, this thread is heading in the direction that I did not want it to (but figured it would go in anyway).

But the short answer to your question is this. If someone threatens me or my family with bodily injury - be it with a knife, stick, club, mace, dog, or gun - at that point I would do what was necessary to end that threat within the confines of common sense.

And as far as using the weapon for self defense, you are correct in your assumption that it would be used with the intended purpose of putting a permanent end to the person threatening me.

When your pumping gas alone at night, walking through the parking lot to your car, or wherever else you may be approached and someone approaches you with a knife or club, what will your response be? Hoping the police get there in time? Begging for your life? Hoping the assailant is happy with taking your wallet and running. I know that with a handgun that I at least even the odds a little bit. It's (guns) not the end-all be-all solution, but it sure beats being stabbed or beaten or worse with no option for defense outside of begging not to be killed.

I hope that I never, ever have to pull a gun on anyone. But then again I worked in jails and prisons during my undergrad studies and I have seen too many people who are more than willing to kill, steal, rape and try to kill you than to just rely on the good-heartedness of man.

Hope I didn't ramble.


I don't believe in grit guards.
   
Reply With Quote
  (#27) Old
black bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shine
 
black bart's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-03-2008, 12:09 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemerboy View Post
BB....I'm not talking about if you can shoot off the butt off a house hold fly at 300 yards....I'm talking about the average person that is caring a gun in public...that has no training as to how to use it in public...law enforcement has that...are they the best shots in every case? no but they are trained to use the gun in pubic and be aware of what is around them.


my question more so for you is...why do you want to carry a gun in public?
To protect myself and people like you from those among us who want to rob rap and do harm.

If someone tries to rob me or threatens my life I understand that by the time they respond I would be dead.
Instead of dialing 911 I prefer 357

In the 57 years that I have had a CWP I have not had to shoot anyone but their have been three occasion where I used my weapon to prevent being robed and seriously harmed or maybe killed.
   
Reply With Quote
  (#28) Old
COME AT ME BRO
JaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust ShineJaredPointer Can Make Rust Shine
 
JaredPointer's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-03-2008, 12:10 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemerboy View Post
I would not want to be a person trying to prove self defense in a court of law in this country.
I would not want to be the man in the casket who got stabbed over his wallet and wound up standing at the Pearly Gates.


I don't believe in grit guards.
   
Reply With Quote
  (#29) Old
Just One More Coat
Beemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust ShineBeemerboy Can Make Rust Shine
 
Beemerboy's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-03-2008, 12:18 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by black bart View Post
To protect myself and people like you from those among us who want to rob rap and do harm.

If someone tries to rob me or threatens my life I understand that by the time they respond I would be dead.
Instead of dialing 911 I prefer 357

In the 57 years that I have had a CWP I have not had to shoot anyone but their have been three occasion where I used my weapon to prevent being robed and seriously harmed or maybe killed.
In my 54 years..I have not once felt the need to have a gun, to defend myself.....I don't hold that againsnt anyone that wants to carry one...none!

I can clearly see your side..in this and DO NOT want this to become a pi$$ match....I just hope that you can see mine and respect it as I have yours


Old Enough To Know Better, Too Stupid To Care....

Dave's Detailing
Sonoma County, CA
   
Reply With Quote
  (#30) Old
black bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shineblack bart Can Make Rust Shine
 
black bart's Avatar
 
Re: Firearms carry - 12-03-2008, 12:27 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by JaredPointer View Post
Well, this thread is heading in the direction that I did not want it to (but figured it would go in anyway).


I hope that I never, ever have to pull a gun on anyone. But then again I worked in jails and prisons during my undergrad studies and I have seen too many people who are more than willing to kill, steal, rape and try to kill you than to just rely on the good-heartedness of man.

Hope I didn't ramble.
Sounds like you got a reality check early in life with a job like that.

I spent 42 years as a long distance trucker pulling into rest areas in the middle of the night and walking to the rest rooms.
Switching trailers in a back lot in Chicago or Detroit or hundreds of other places at 3am I could tell you some things that would make your hair stand on end.
   
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes


» Autopia Forums Sponsor
» Current Poll
Hobby, Part-Time, or Full-Time?
Hobby - 60.18%
68 Votes
Part-Time - 26.55%
30 Votes
Full-Time - 13.27%
15 Votes
Total Votes: 113
You may not vote on this poll.
» Total Pros Training Seminars
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.1


3.8.7
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
Copyright ©, 2002-2011, AutopiaForums.com - All Rights Reserved


Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71