December 30th, 2009 03:15 AM
+ A bunch...
Originally Posted by HardCorps79
Very well put.
I'll shut up now...
December 30th, 2009 08:38 AM
December 30th, 2009 09:23 AM
He indeed did know what he was doing but you can bet he didn't do it on your behalf or mine. Don't give this exhibitionist hero status. He's an attention seeker Charlie, nothing more. His motives are selfish. If he is "wanting to make a statement" as you say that statement is simply "Look at me". Of course I too could be giving him too much credit and maybe he's simply stupid. Actually I think I've wasted enough time thinking about this guy. Those who think he deserves a pedestal to perch on are not likely to change their opinions anyway.
Originally Posted by charliej47
December 31st, 2009 01:13 AM
I support the Second Amendment and the people that also legally do.
The Second Amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Do you think that the Second Amendment is only for people you agree with?
Do you think that the Second Amendment is only for certain hand guns?
Do you think that the Second Amendment is only for guns of a certain color?
Do you think that the Second Amendment is only for people whose motives you approve?
Do you think that the Second Amendment is only for people of certain skin colors or religions?
Do you think that the Second Amendment is only to be legally exercised by others when you want?
Do you think that the Second Amendment is only to be legally exercised by others the way you want?
The Second Amendment doesnít say any of the above. It says the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. This means your right shall not be infringed.
1 - Do you support the Second Amendment?
2 - Are you legally exercising your Second Amendment right?
If you say yes to the above I support you.
Does my support for you always mean I agree with you? No
If I donít agree with you why would I support you? Because your are not breaking any laws and I support the Second Amendment - your right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
If you are knowingly breaking laws when exercising your Second Amendment right I will no longer support you.
When you are exercising your Second Amendment right you are not my enemy because this is what the Second Amendment is all about. Some may perceive your legally exercising your Second Amendment right as fuel for the antiís but the antiís would say this no matter what you do, so this cannot be true. Some would say that by you legally exercising your Second Amendment right you will scare some of the sheep but some of the sheep will always be scared until they get used to seeing you legally exercising your Second Amendment right. The antiís are the ones trying to infringe on your rights. A supporter of the Second Amendment wouldnít do this.
To the gun owners that donít support kwikrnu, (or people you take exception too) you are the ones fueling the antiís not them. By your lack of support the cause is divided. Just what the antiís want. Since you donít support a man legally exercising his second amendment rights why should anyone else? Maybe he shouldnít be allowed to exercise his second amendment rights. Isnít this the next logical step? Isnít this the antiís position? By not supporting a man legally exercising his second amendment rights you are only one step from becoming the antiĎs. Stop dividing the cause. Stop fueling the antiís. Support your brothers that believe in the Second Amendment whether you agree with them or not.
How do you support your brothers that support the Second Amendment?
There could be many ways. Iíll suggest 2 -
1 - Donít bash them in public.
2 - In kwikrnuís case join him on his next outing.
December 31st, 2009 01:30 AM
S&W M&P40/M&P9c OC rigs
S&W 640-1 or Sig P238 as a CC rig
Second Amendment Foundation Life member
December 31st, 2009 06:31 AM
December 31st, 2009 03:02 PM
I'll close my discussion in this thread by quoting the Apostle Paul.
1 Corinthians 6:12 *∂All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
1 Corinthians 10:23 *∂All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
Being legal does not make a thing expedient or edifying. That is the way I see this. Even though legal it can be counter productive for our cause, and I won't let the fact that it was legal cause me to support it.
Happy New Year, All.
December 31st, 2009 03:30 PM
Good idea. I think kwikrnu has had more than enough attention here.
Originally Posted by JerryM
January 2nd, 2010 01:35 AM
He isn't helping our cause is the first thing that comes to mind. But, if he isn't breaking the law, then he is within his rights to do it.
Last edited by HotGuns; February 25th, 2010 at 09:51 PM.
Reason: bad words
February 25th, 2010 04:24 PM
Originally Posted by wmhawth
Don't worry, he always finds a way to get banned from discussion boards.
Always remember that others may hate you but those who hate you don't win unless you hate them. And then you destroy yourself.
Richard M Nixon
Owning a handgun doesn't make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician.Ē
February 25th, 2010 05:29 PM
This entire debate is interesting. Most of you agree that Kwik was within his rights. Those of you who object to his actions due so primarily on the basis of the type of weapon he chose.
What you should realize, is that to many non-shooters and many persons not familiar with weapons, your 1911 on your hip is just as scary as his AK.
Me, I do agree with the current OC movement, and I think this guy (Kwik) is a showman asking for trouble. BUT I support his right to open carry his AK, and your right to open carry your 1911 (or whatever). Even though I don't really agree with it.
February 25th, 2010 05:49 PM
February 25th, 2010 09:36 PM
Forgive the timid and intolerant here, law enforcement has to be helped to understand there are legal/constitutional lines they must respect. For that, you have my sincere appreciation.
LEO conduct is too often outrageous and excessive. I see this common thread in your and others experience with law enforcement -- efforts to discourage future actions by making the stop onerous. What should take a very few minutes to check out, and send the citizen on his way, is dragged out sometimes for hours. Most people have no problem with LEO's checking them out as long as they are reasonable. Drawn guns is not reasonable without RAS. Cuffing and stuffing, no matter how temporary, is intimidation.
I think many LEO's don't realize they are dealing with more than just the "suspect" in front of them. Bad encounters get spread around the net and incrementally build resentments. I never had an ambivalent opinion of LEO's until I started reading about individual encounters that greatly offended my feelings of justice. They foster the "us versus them" atmosphere, which I hate to see. We're on the same side of law and order!!!!
This LEO offensive behavior has to be intentional. I can't believe the officers haven't anything else to do than stand around so long with you. I have too much respect for law enforcement to think they are so stupid. I have a hard time accepting that LEO's are so ignorant of OC and CC issues in this day and time. Dragging our the process is either ignorance or intentional, and common sense comes down on the side of intentional. Just IMHO.
The separate issue of getting unconstitutional laws changed and/or rationalized is important but not as much as preventing abuses of lawful practices and procedures. Many people can disagree with you about what you do for the political arena. That doesn't mean you should stop representing lawful conduct between 2A and LE.
What you do is just and, in the long run, beneficial to preserving our liberties. Thank you.
February 25th, 2010 09:45 PM
Making a point??
I like to make a point as much as the next guy. I ask you this:
If you are carrying - concealed or open but in a more typical manner- while playing in the park with your child or grand child and someone walks by carrying a rifle or large pistol on a sling - will you not give it another thought or will you pull your child closer and double check your carry piece?
February 25th, 2010 11:12 PM
You got that right....
Originally Posted by jahwarrior72
I give props for doing what he did. Many here would just prefer to keep emailing political figures instead of going raw, and getting thier hands dirty.
I think the Rosa Parks relation is perfect.
By ExSoldier in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: April 11th, 2010, 04:35 PM
By ShawnMoncali in forum Forum News, Feedback, Problems & Comments
Last Post: March 15th, 2010, 11:54 AM
By SIGguy229 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: June 22nd, 2007, 02:20 PM
By goawayfarm in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: June 16th, 2007, 09:19 AM
By cagueits in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: April 20th, 2007, 01:00 AM
Search tags for this page
second amendment, what do you think?
which one do you think is better the 13 amendment or the 14 or 15
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors