View Single Post
Old August 28, 2012, 07:34 AM   #20
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 2,539
Originally Posted by Frank Ettin
Which we learned in EL-skule is short for post hoc ergo phooey hoc.

Originally Posted by Frank Ettin
Something may be a right, but how a right is exercised has social consequences.
Indeed. One social consequence of OC is that as people see it, they become accustomed to it. Another can be that POs get used to it.

OC has not been prohibited by law in Ohio going back at least two decades. If a PO saw someone carrying, he would testify that he could not see the weapon as he approached because the weapon was on the pther side of the person and therefore was concealed. Combine that with a judge who is happy to convict anyone carrying a firearm, and you have a judicially imposed OC prohibition. It took people pressing the point to start to change the culture so that Ohioans don't end up with a felony conviction for exercising a right in ordinary circumstances.

I don't think a PO can be baited by legal activity. I don't consider myself to be baiting authrotities when I drive under the speed limit or speak publicly or vote. I don't trust everyone to do all those things responsibly, but the nature of a right is that people get to undertake those activities even when I think they aren't doing it correctly.

Should we strive to be good ambassadors? Certainly. An ambassador who carries and video records is one who carries a message that both are benign. That seems a fitting message for an ambassador to carry.

Last edited by zukiphile; August 28, 2012 at 08:27 AM.
zukiphile is offline  
Page generated in 0.05208 seconds with 7 queries