|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 9, 2015, 06:31 AM | #126 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
Quote:
|
|
June 9, 2015, 06:42 AM | #127 | |
Junior member
Join Date: August 28, 2012
Posts: 240
|
Quote:
They could trespass him no more than they could trespass someone for the color of his skin. Hartsfield-Jackson isn't private property. C'mon guys, this isn't exactly rocket science. |
|
June 9, 2015, 06:48 AM | #128 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
Quote:
|
|
June 9, 2015, 07:36 AM | #129 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
Quote:
|
|
June 9, 2015, 09:25 AM | #130 |
Member
Join Date: October 19, 2014
Posts: 19
|
There are many ways to detain an individual over bizarre disturbing behavior. Atlanta decided to let it pass. Everyone here hangs their hat on he simply was exercising a protected right. It was in the manner he chose to exercise that right that could have and should have got him in trouble. Maybe not found guilty of but certainly within the realm of probably cause that police utilize every day. I have to believe that decision to let him walk came from a higher authority not wanting to spend millions proving this man an idiot. You think Im wrong go ahead and suit up and try it at your local Walmart the outcome may not be the same. This type of behavior will not last and attempts to stop this will happen if this action continues.
|
June 9, 2015, 09:54 AM | #131 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
|
Quote:
First, this episode actually demonstrates that even an armed ninnie wasn't actually a public harm. He drew a little attention, had a chat with POs, and dropped his daughter off. You don't want freedom of action to be limited to those who have demonstrated sufficient judgment to the satisfaction of a state minion. Second, one should never contest the point that that some firearm owners lack good judgment. The point is certainly true, but not pertinent. Some people lack the good judgment to drive safely, write sensibly or buy healthy food.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
June 9, 2015, 10:36 AM | #132 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
June 9, 2015, 10:39 AM | #133 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
Quote:
|
|
June 9, 2015, 10:45 AM | #134 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2009
Posts: 3,963
|
When open carry comes up for a vote in your state, and the opposition puts video of this airport stunt on the air non-stop, tell all your friends and neighbors how walking around in urban settings is no big deal, and Cooley is comparable to Jesus or Gandhi.
With that kind of logic behind it, we'll be lucky to be able to carry a penknife beyond our front door in just a few more years. |
June 9, 2015, 10:50 AM | #135 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 9, 2013
Posts: 116
|
Why is it OK for Police and Military personnel to openly carry a firearm and everyone is ambivilent to there presence, but when a American citizen does it, the sky starts falling? And yet everyone says they supports the 2nd Amendment? Amazing.
Hundreds of thousands of military member have carried REAL "Military Rifles" in civilian airports for a long time (Well before 9-11 ). Is it the spiffy comabt pickle suit(digitals) they wear that put the public at ease? Nope. Maybe the citizenry was unable to see them, sence they blend into the environment so well? Nope. Was there rampit panic in the terminal as hundreds of Military Personnel filled through to their Milflight? Nope. Do police open carry firearms in Airports? Yep. Now here is the issue, our founding fathers wanted the citizenry to have the same arms and ability to bear arms to defend themselves as our Armed Military did, correct? if not, then cite source that founders did not beleave so. Some may worry about the probing that a terrorist might do to test for weaknesses of a facility. Gentlemen, I don't fear an old guy, open carrying a rifle legally. If you do, then you're probably missing the clean cut young to middle aged man/woman with a briefcase or backpack that goes unnoticed by blending in. The open rifle carrier guy is known thing. The things that you don't see are often what is likely to be ones doom. Additionally, by defining what this guy was carrying as a "Military Style Weapon" it would imply that there is some meaning to such a classification vs Open carrying a rifle. Are there any NON Military Style Weapons? If so what are they? Assuming there are any. what "Non-Military Style Rifle" would have been ok? If it doesn't matter, and all rifles would be just as offensive regardless, then why state it as an issue? The "fire" in the theater issue, is not an about inflicting emotional distress on those in the theater that is the rub. Emotional distress was covered in Flint v. Falwell case. Thus, if yelling "Fire" in a public building was made Illegal, then what would happens if there was a fire in a theater? Everyone burns(great policy, roll eyes). The issue with "fire" in the theater is often used to make the point that even the first Amendment has limitations. Yep, it does. So what? There is already a law about pointing a gun at someone just to see them run like hell for a thrill already(just like the 1st A). Is there anyplace, in the U.S.A., that a citizen is not allowed to Pray even in "sensative areas"? Nope. Any "Pray free Zones"? Nope. The "fire" in the theater analogy has no bearing on the issue in the airport, unless you can prove that he was actively threatning people by pointing his rifle at them (which there is a law against). Mehavey: "Through his incredibly stupid and self-serving act, "Mr Cooley" has demonstrated what the anti-gun crowd have been touting all along... that gun owners lack the judgement to be entrusted with deadly weapons" Hmmm. Does that assumption include the individuals that chose to conceal carry as well? Since, they carry their firearms in the same manner as common criminals, aren't they just as self serving? If not, then I find your logic falty. Officers of the Law often drive their police vehicles over the speed limit, fail to signal, fail to stop at stop signs....without any reason to do so, yet they write tickets for such violations on citizens for doing the same thing. Your argument sounds simular. |
June 9, 2015, 10:59 AM | #136 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
|
Quote:
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
June 9, 2015, 11:30 AM | #137 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
Quote:
Its not hard at all to find circumstances where mass killers/terrorists have opened up or tried to open up on civilians. Again, if you want to play cop graduate from Police Academy and become an officer. You don't have the same powers they do. |
|
June 9, 2015, 11:37 AM | #138 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 2013
Location: Western slope of Colorado
Posts: 3,678
|
This guy has not helped and probably hurt the cause of privite gun ownership, and the carrying of same.
The avg person seeing him in the airport was probably concerned. That does not sway the folks sitting on the fence about gun control to our side. You cant compare his behavior to the UNIFORMED LEO or UNIFORMED military carrying openly in public. The UNIFORM is a visual badge showing the public that the LEO belongs there with that equipment. Look at the dissenting opinions on THIS forum, and we are all PRO GUN. The public at large will have an even more negative view. Events like this are the poster child for more restrictive regulations. This guy played right into the hands of the Anti's Last edited by Tom Servo; June 9, 2015 at 12:35 PM. Reason: Reference to deleted post |
June 9, 2015, 11:49 AM | #139 | |||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Second, we really don't know what folks thought about that then. But in any case, that was then, and this is now. The reality is that social norms and values change over time. Many things which were socially acceptable 150 years ago aren't now. And many things which are socially acceptable now were not 150 years ago. Reality is what goes on in the world -- not what goes on in your head. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|||
June 9, 2015, 11:53 AM | #140 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 9, 2013
Posts: 116
|
Kilimanjaro: "When open carry comes up for a vote in your state"
No worriers, Permissive open carry is already legal in my state, and has been that way since I moved here in the 80's. Prior to that I lived in Vermont. What else you got? |
June 9, 2015, 12:05 PM | #141 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 9, 2013
Posts: 116
|
Frank: "Reality is what goes on in the world -- not what goes on in your head."
Really, prove it. When you think you see a car the light entering your eye triggers chemical reactions in the retina, these produce electro-chemical impulses which travel though nerve fibers to the brain. Then the brain analyses the data it receives, and then creates its own picture of what is out there. Then and only then have you had the experience of seeing a car. But what are you actually experiencing is not the car itself, or only the image that appears in the mind. Thus reality is in your mind. Last edited by bandaid1; June 9, 2015 at 12:22 PM. |
June 9, 2015, 12:07 PM | #142 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 2013
Location: Western slope of Colorado
Posts: 3,678
|
Quote:
Its nice that you think YOU are good to go. Some of us look at other factors |
|
June 9, 2015, 12:19 PM | #143 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
|
It's a fair point that feelings and logic may bring people to different conclusions, but that doesn't bear on whether there is any logic to bringing up a benign incident as support for a prohibition.
Quote:
Moreover, POs are slightly more likely to engage in some forms of violent conduct, so it can't be having survived the rigors police training that cause most people little alarm at the sight of an armed PO. It is plausible to argue that ordinary sights will raise little alarm while extraordinary sights are more likely to cause alarm.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php Last edited by Tom Servo; June 9, 2015 at 12:35 PM. Reason: Reference to deleted post |
|
June 9, 2015, 12:32 PM | #144 | |||
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
I hear the "use it or lose it" argument from the open-carry folks all the time. It may sound satisfying (at least to an approving chorus), but it has no verifiable basis in fact. Quote:
There has never been a halcyon golden age in which people could walk around anywhere they want, carrying any kind of weapon they want. That's a romanticized view taken from 1950's fictional cowboy movies. It really concerns me that open-carry advocates base some of their arguments on that. Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|||
June 9, 2015, 12:33 PM | #145 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
You did not cite anything to show police have anywhere near the instances of attempted mass killing, with or without a rifle.
Please cite an instance where a police officer walked into an airport and started attacking people. Please cite an instance where a police officer walked into a restaurant and started shooting people. Please cite an instance where a police officer walked into a school and started shooting people. please cite an instance where a police officer walked into a theater and started shooting people. Please cite an instance where a police officer attempted to kill dozens of people at a cartoon competition. Quote:
|
|
June 9, 2015, 12:39 PM | #146 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,869
|
Quote:
That we have such people even in the highest echelons of those we would ordinarily think of as 2A friends should not be passed over lightly. (to wit: Yesterday afternoon I listened to Fox/Megyn Kelly expound at length on the common-sense goodness of Universal Background Checks) |
|
June 9, 2015, 12:43 PM | #147 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 9, 2013
Posts: 116
|
Sharkbite: "What about other people in other states"
Ok, I'll bite, what about them? There are currently only 6 states that ban open carry. Calif, NY, Ill, FL, SC and TX. In SC the house just passed unlicensed concealed carry, the vote was 90 to 18 http://www.guns.com/2015/04/27/south...utional-carry/. TX looks like they will soon get open carry by January. California has the lawsuit pending on the issue in the 9th Circuit. I'm not sure what you want me to say. Keep fighting the good fight? Hooyah |
June 9, 2015, 12:51 PM | #148 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
|
Quote:
Quote:
It is beyond dispute that POs shoot people daily, usually for the better. If you doubt that, you should feel free to watch the local news in lots of cities for a couple of weeks. Quote:
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|||
June 9, 2015, 01:20 PM | #149 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
|
Quote:
|
|
June 9, 2015, 01:21 PM | #150 |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Things are getting intemperate. Posts have been deleted, and people have received stern talkings-to.
Does anyone remember the name of the guy who carried a rifle into the airport? No? That's because this whole thing has wandered far afield.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|