View Single Post
Old December 29, 2009, 09:20 AM   #109
Senior Member
Join Date: June 9, 2001
Location: Lafayette, Indiana--American-occupied America
Posts: 5,416
What about Columbine? The media had a field day with the ammo brought by the shooter. The government tightened the noose on us a little more with each shooting and the public became more concerned about such.
No, it did not. After Columbine the gun show bill went down to a spectacular defeat.

After Fort Hood there was a marked absence of gun control proposals.

Further, don't you find it the least bit offensive to compare someone who carries a pistol for self-defense to those bent on mass murder at Fort Hood and Columbine?

If this is a "possession equals intent" argument, aren't all males guilty of rape?

Check the 911 calls each day from any mid- large size city in the south
O.K., so they are scared of guns down South. So what?

What does this have to do with carrying extra ammo?

People are hitting the streets armed for war and the media plays on the fears of the public in telling what is found.
Really? Where are people armed for war? Afghanistan? Iraq?

Since the police carry extra ammo, are the police armed for war? The police are out to kill us? Should we treat the police as our enemy because they have extra ammo?

Now compare that to a person carrying a revolver. They generally carry one gun, no extra ammo and feel comfortable and safe.
False feelings of security do not interest me. For everyone person who know who does not carry extra ammo for a revolver, I know several (including myself) who do carry extra ammo.

What if I carry extra ammo, three guns, two knives and a flashlight and I feel comfortable and safe? What about my feelings?

But 2-3 spare mags makes it appear to the public that you are about to declare war.
Ahhh, I see, so the Lafayette (Indiana) Police Department carries 46 rounds of ammo, visible to all to see, then the police are out to declare war on me?

An Indiana State Trooper carries 52 rounds of ammo (plus his back up gun) visible for all to see. Is this trooper out to declare war on me? In your world is he a threat, or since he is an only one, this is permissible?

I knew the police were a threat to me! Thanks for confirming my fears.

However if the trend continues, and many Chiefs of Police have already began rumblings, about the complaints they are getting on armed citizens
I could care less about what complaints a Chief of Police gets about my civil right to carry a gun. I'll bet down South plenty of people complained about African-Americans sitting at lunch counters or riding on buses. How uppity of them! If only they would meekly keep their place I say, I say.

The police swear an oath to the state and federal Constitutions. Both of these documents recognize my right to carry a gun or guns and as much extra ammo as I damn well please. The police will obey the Constitution, or they will be serving crawdads and gumbo somewhere.

If police chiefs received complaints about books, or churches, or computer forums, would we have to stop reading, worshipping or yakking on the Errornet? Of course not. The Bill of Rights protects the rights of the minority against the bleating and whining of the majority.

Keep on showing the guns, braqging about how much ammo and guns they have.
It is legal for me to do so, further it is my right. I refuse to be intimidated not to exercise my rights.

More stores are now posting signs restricting gun carry. This state is gun friendly. We can carry open, get a CCW with minimum training, keep in vehicles without a CCW and many other things. Yet we can no longer walk into a residence carrying concealed without telling the residents and getting permission to enter the home. It only took a handful of complaints to get that into the state law. Look for WalMart to put signs up in the next few months forbiding weapon carry.
I know the South is different and you have a history of restricting civil rights, but it sounds like y'all better get off your backsides and get to work. We have no such silliness here.

Perhaps there is a state organization that you can work with?
"Arguments of policy must give way to a constitutional command." Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 602 (1980).

Last edited by KSFreeman; December 29, 2009 at 09:32 AM.
KSFreeman is offline  
Page generated in 0.03865 seconds with 7 queries