This is a discussion on If You Are Like This Guy, You Are Not Helping... within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Havok I was just thinking, I’m sure Bloomberg’s staff will be sending out emails to some gun owners thanking them for taking ...
This topic seems to be dividing the gun community.
Sore another point to the oppressors.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Remember, during the late 19th century, west of the Mississippi river saw men carrying guns openly often. During the same time, few people were left openly carrying guns in Boston, NYC etc.
And lets look at depictions of the Continental Congress, I've never seen any of them openly carrying arms while determining what's to be included in the BOR.
Retired Leathersmith and Practical Shooter
"Qui desiderat pacem, præparet bellum."
Annoy a Liberal!! Get a job and think for yourself!
Some of the comparisons being made are not quite in alignment.
First, coming from a family with several member who were 'first blacks', All of these men and women were not out to make a political statement. They just wanted to do what they enjoyed doing. This applies to playing football and achieving high ranks in the military. On the flip side, my father did work to change the political landscape in Massachusetts during the 60's.
Second, and my history is a little weak on this one. I am not sure of the that Parks set out to make a change. She, like most, were simply tired of the experience and just sat down. Life being black during the the first half of the century was exhausting.
Last, Open carry pre-, during, and post the reconstruction was not a political statement but more of intimidation and defense. From some of the history of Race and guns that I am currently reading, the US looked to be on the verge of a major internal war. Both sides of race were definitely in a full feud.
Admittedly, I am still learning/reading historical works, but at this moment, I am seriously considering that the emancipation was more out of political necessity to prevent a complete war. Many local gun laws were enacted as local attempts to control one side or the other.
In other words, there is more depth to Rosa Parks than current OC statements. the background was far more violent than current OC statements which seem to be more of an effort to change minds. As a result, I remain on the fence but do default to acceptance of their actions although, the activity could be better organized for a cleaner result.
Also, appearances matter. It's a fact. It's been shown in study after study. It matters to adults, to kids, even to animals. So, how the gun community portrays itself matters.
Look at the guy in the photo below. I don't know him. He could be a very nice guy. But I will never let my kids play with his, operate on my parents, serve me food, do any home/car repairs, or even walk my dog. Is that judgemental? Hell, yes! But humans are designed, hardwired, to be judgemental, to discriminate, to categorize. We do it when we pick a mate, when shop for a car, when we make friends.
So, the person in the OP's photo may have every right to OC a rifle at a farmers market. Absolutely. But he ain't converting anyone to our side which we need to do if we want to secure our rights in the future.
When I wore a badge we had a practice that worked pretty well. Everyone who wore a badge got the benefit of the doubt, until proven conclusively that they were not worthy of it. In fact, everyone, badge or not, got the benefit of the doubt until we had evidence to the contrary. People say a picture speaks a thousand words, and that may be true. But no one has ever said a single photo, or even 30 minutes of video, tells the WHOLE STORY. It doesn't cost anybody anything (except a bit of childish chest thumping) to give ALL gun owners the benefit of the doubt until the person is proven by the evidence not to warrant it.
The best way I know for everyone to lose ALL rights protected under the 2nd Amendment is for gun owners to judge all other gun owners motives and intentions based on ignorance because all we see is a PHOTO. We turn on each other at the drop of a hat, and then wonder why the people who want to confiscate guns continue to make strides to do just that.
Does anyone here remember the vehemence that gun owners who only hunt used on anyone who dared to suggest it should be legal for people wanting to protect their lives to carry a pistol?
IMHO it would be far better we reserve judgement until the evidence is in. In that way we would present a united front. I'm just not sold on the fact that those who judge and condemn the motives of others based on such superficial evidence are not a greater threat to freedom than anyone else - even those who stand on a presidential debate stage and declare they intend to confiscate guns.
And I'll probably get flamed for saying this, but exactly how many of YOU have done ANYTHING to convince ANYONE in a public place that concealed carriers, (who are secretive in the extreme) are worthy to be trusted with a gun? And by that I mean let anyone know you carry a deadly weapon but would never use it to harm an innocent person? Anyone who carries concealed ever done that to influence anyone? You think anybody has ever looked at you (with your carefully hidden pistol) and said to themselves, "Wow, that is a responsible gun owner" ?
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits."