Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Sound Off' started by Gamekeeper, Oct 30, 2020.
There is a difference between liberty and license.
It boils down to not can you but should you.
I brandished when I voted two weeks ago. I was dropping my absentee ballot off at the clerk's office and my .45 was digging into my hip so I pulled it out in the parking lot and stuck it in my truck console. I sure hope the three people that watched me weren't scared and I changed their vote...
This is just more political BS.
I don’t think people are accustomed to seeing people armed at the polls. Seems kind of Third World country-ish to me.
Mob?! Well, you're pretty easy to read. I'll throw this at you as it may be of interest to your initially stated topic of discussion.
Have you ever been to a third world country? I've been to a bunch. I think we should all have to vote in person and stick our thumb in an ink well so our citizens don't vote more than once. Seem fair?
Seems civilish to me.
How many third world countries have you been in that allow open carry by civilian voters? Let alone allow civilians to go about their business armed.
Which group is more likely to be victims , the armed or the unarmed?
If the sight of a gun carried open is intimidating , concealed carry must be doubly frightening.(?)
But still nobody brought anybody to court over brandishing. Why? Because nobody brandished, they simply exercised their right to open carry. Doesn't matter if I think what they did was the right thing to do. The fact of the matter is no one was charged with brandishing.
So I can take my three carry pieces to the poll with me to vote?
Sure, why not. Just don't wave them around unless you need to. An AR on a single point sling will probably draw some drama though. Maybe sling it around your back and not at the ready position? Be safe guys.
Some duct tape on your sabres blade carried in your teeth , will prevent chipping them...
Be sure to smile though , lest you intimidate someone.
It doesn't boil down to that at all. It boils down to what is legal and what is not, not our emotions.
Yup, and if you want cause a meltdown raise up your shirt a little exposing your holster.
The GR decision seems to clearly say
The police can detain you, they can disarm you, they can interrogate you, and then they get to decide on the spot if the charge of brandishing is warranted or not.
Thank you judge in the Grand Rapids case (linked to above) for helping me to understand what the process is when these matters arise.
There seems to be the sanctioned presumption that the police are the reasonable person in brandishing cases.
While I am staunchly pro second amendment, those DBags who open carry ARs and such just to make a "statement" make a few statements to me.
1) They aren't very bright, because this ridiculous statement of carrying their AR around because they can is the type of idiocy that will solidify public sentiment against us.
2) Most of them seem to be teetering upon the edge of being completely imbalanced to begin with. They think parading around with firearms on display will garner them the respect they can't seem to get any other way.
3) They probably have sexual issues, and the rifle is a substitute for something else.
I like #3! LOL...crazy times this year Paul...