Gun nuts intimidate mothers in parking lot

[Pogo]

Why are you so hung up on are they loaded? I can load an AR-15 in about a second and a half. Loaded/unloaded seems to be your whole argument against a group demonstrating in support of a Constitutional right.
1. Do they have a legal right to carry their weapons in this situation?
2. Is that right in any way changed by the fact that said weapons [may be] loaded?
Emotions, minutiae, political bents and religious beliefs are NOT a part of this discussion.

Because loading the guns means you're expecting to fire at something. And that doesn't sync with the idea of a "demonstration". If demonstration is your quest, you can do it with unloaded guns or even fake guns. It's not reasonable to presume that a mothers group founded specifically against gun violence is unaware that their own state has an open carry law, so that's' a non starter.

In a way it is about emotions, since that IS the tool the OCT was using. And again, that show of force would not have the impact without the very history that founded the mothers (some listed above) -- without that environment of gun violence, their appearance makes no particular impression -- they become the lawful citizens y'all fantasize about here. And it's equally unreasonable to presume that OCT is unaware of Aurora and Sandy Hook etc etc ad infinitum. So they know exactly what they're doing, and what the impression will be. Ergo -- intimidation. That was their objective, and they succeeded. Maybe they're now seeing a backlash. That's a good thing. It seems to be driving them to the dialogue they should have gone with in the first place.

The fact that the guns are loaded lends another dimension to the nutworthiness, because you're either (a) expecting to use them against the mothers (which is unlikely), (b) the restaurant is in an area that's so dangerous it requires a posse of 18 people for protection (equally unlikely for a meeting place for MAGV) or (c) you're just damn stupid. (a) and (b) are further unlikely since they have their own kids with them. So what's left?

Bullshit! Does filling your car with gasoline indicate that you are about to mow down a bunch of people at a busy intersection?.

Thought you said I was the one being emotional...?

I have carried weapons for more hours than some people on this board have been breathing. Except for hunting weapons, my weapon has been loaded 100.0000000000% of the time. It has never taken a life or even been fired in response to a threat. The only time, in fact, it has ever left it's holster has been in response to the request of a police officer.
I have in that time, prevented a rape against my first wife and a robbery at knife point against myself. In each case, the mere sight of a nickel plated .44 magnum was enough to discourage the would be assailant.
Yes, they both were intimidated, but they had good reason to be.
These women had no reason to fear for their lives. They were intimidated by a car with a full tank of gas.

None of those compare to showing up with 19 other people pulling your penises... sorry, I mean guns out to show the women in the restaurant. What you describe there is defensive, not offensive.

Again, what they see from the restaurant window is a bunch of people arrive in the parking lot and start drawing guns. In a state where a sniper in Austin killed 17 and wounded 32, a state where 23 were killed in Killeen, your first thought in the moment isn't what's in the Constitution; your first thought is Aurora, Sandy Hook, DC, Powell, Oak Creek, Webster, Lancaster, Kileen, Binghamton, San Diego, Jacksonville, Pittsburgh, San Ysidro, Edmond, Stockton, Virginia Tech, Iowa City, Olivehurst, San Francisco, Garden City, Jonesboro. Atlanta, Fort Worth, Honolulu, Wakefield, Santee, Meridian, Red Lake, Salt Lake, Omaha, DeKalb, Fort Hood, Manchester, Austin, Seal Beach, Oakland, Minneapolis, Brookfield, Santa Monica, DC (again) Columbine and the like. It's survival.

Or did those events simply not happen?

 

[Sunshine]

There is a difference in a 'show of force' and a 'use of force.' Do you recall this picture of the Elian Gonzalez affair? Notice how the officers is pointing the gun, but finger is not on the trigger. The finger rests above on the stock or whatever that part of the gun is called. That is a 'show of force.' Not a 'use of force.'

Elián González affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Actually, it was that picture that made me determined that a cop entering my house uninvited, will die - regardless of whether it costs me my life.

Note to Pogo: That picture is what we call intimidation. 18 men and 2 children posing for a picture? Not so much.

Which is the purpose of a show of force. We didn't use weapons but when we wanted someone in the psych hospital to settle down, we did a show of force by having staff come from other units and stand with us while we corrected the person's behavior or gave an injection. What went down in that pic of those people just being there with guns wasn't even a show of force. It was a show of RIGHTS!

 

[Sunshine]

Because loading the guns means you're expecting to fire at something. And that doesn't sync with the idea of a "demonstration". If demonstration is your quest, you can do it with unloaded guns or even fake guns. It's not reasonable to presume that a mothers group founded specifically against gun violence is unaware that their own state has an open carry law, so that's' a non starter.

In a way it is about emotions, since that IS the tool the OCT was using. And again, that show of force would not have the impact without the very history that founded the mothers (some listed above) -- without that environment of gun violence, their appearance makes no particular impression -- they become the lawful citizens y'all fantasize about here. And it's equally unreasonable to presume that OCT is unaware of Aurora and Sandy Hook etc etc ad infinitum. So they know exactly what they're doing, and what the impression will be. Ergo -- intimidation. That was their objective, and they succeeded. Maybe they're now seeing a backlash. That's a good thing. It seems to be driving them to the dialogue they should have gone with in the first place.

The fact that the guns are loaded lends another dimension to the nutworthiness, because you're either (a) expecting to use them against the mothers (which is unlikely), (b) the restaurant is in an area that's so dangerous it requires a posse of 18 people for protection (equally unlikely for a meeting place for MAGV) or (c) you're just damn stupid. (a) and (b) are further unlikely since they have their own kids with them. So what's left?

Bullshit! Does filling your car with gasoline indicate that you are about to mow down a bunch of people at a busy intersection?.

Thought you said I was the one being emotional...?

I have carried weapons for more hours than some people on this board have been breathing. Except for hunting weapons, my weapon has been loaded 100.0000000000% of the time. It has never taken a life or even been fired in response to a threat. The only time, in fact, it has ever left it's holster has been in response to the request of a police officer.
I have in that time, prevented a rape against my first wife and a robbery at knife point against myself. In each case, the mere sight of a nickel plated .44 magnum was enough to discourage the would be assailant.
Yes, they both were intimidated, but they had good reason to be.
These women had no reason to fear for their lives. They were intimidated by a car with a full tank of gas.

None of those compare to showing up with 19 other people pulling your penises... sorry, I mean guns out to show the women in the restaurant. What you describe there is defensive, not offensive.

Again, what they see from the restaurant window is a bunch of people arrive in the parking lot and start drawing guns. In a state where a sniper in Austin killed 17 and wounded 32, a state where 23 were killed in Killeen, your first thought in the moment isn't what's in the Constitution; your first thought is Aurora, Sandy Hook, DC, Powell, Oak Creek, Webster, Lancaster, Kileen, Binghamton, San Diego, Jacksonville, Pittsburgh, San Ysidro, Edmond, Stockton, Virginia Tech, Iowa City, Olivehurst, San Francisco, Garden City, Jonesboro. Atlanta, Fort Worth, Honolulu, Wakefield, Santee, Meridian, Red Lake, Salt Lake, Omaha, DeKalb, Fort Hood, Manchester, Austin, Seal Beach, Oakland, Minneapolis, Brookfield, Santa Monica, DC (again) Columbine and the like. It's survival.

Or did those events simply not happen?

How many penises does he have?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Bullshit! Does filling your car with gasoline indicate that you are about to mow down a bunch of people at a busy intersection?.

Thought you said I was the one being emotional...?

I have carried weapons for more hours than some people on this board have been breathing. Except for hunting weapons, my weapon has been loaded 100.0000000000% of the time. It has never taken a life or even been fired in response to a threat. The only time, in fact, it has ever left it's holster has been in response to the request of a police officer.
I have in that time, prevented a rape against my first wife and a robbery at knife point against myself. In each case, the mere sight of a nickel plated .44 magnum was enough to discourage the would be assailant.
Yes, they both were intimidated, but they had good reason to be.
These women had no reason to fear for their lives. They were intimidated by a car with a full tank of gas.

None of those compare to showing up with 19 other people pulling your penises... sorry, I mean guns out to show the women in the restaurant. What you describe there is defensive, not offensive.

Again, what they see from the restaurant window is a bunch of people arrive in the parking lot and start drawing guns. In a state where a sniper in Austin killed 17 and wounded 32, a state where 23 were killed in Killeen, your first thought in the moment isn't what's in the Constitution; your first thought is Aurora, Sandy Hook, DC, Powell, Oak Creek, Webster, Lancaster, Kileen, Binghamton, San Diego, Jacksonville, Pittsburgh, San Ysidro, Edmond, Stockton, Virginia Tech, Iowa City, Olivehurst, San Francisco, Garden City, Jonesboro. Atlanta, Fort Worth, Honolulu, Wakefield, Santee, Meridian, Red Lake, Salt Lake, Omaha, DeKalb, Fort Hood, Manchester, Austin, Seal Beach, Oakland, Minneapolis, Brookfield, Santa Monica, DC (again) Columbine and the like. It's survival.

Or did those events simply not happen?

How many penises does he have?

Pogo has just the one protruding from his neck.

 

[Pogo]

You would have preferred more innocent people died?

The gunman was stopped, that IS a good thing, among the sane.

I would have preferred a society where the presence of an armed citizen putting a killer down isn't necessary. Pick up after your emotional dog droppings.

What the FUCK???? Can't you answer a question without the constant air of superiority bullshit?

How the fuck do you get "superiority" out of that??

The poster posited a premise that was leading and inaccurate -- I corrected him.

What the fuck, I can't answer a simple question?? You'd prefer I sit down, shut up and offer no response to bullshit about me -- on a message board??



I desire a world without the fetish on guns and violence. That's no secret. I said so here, I said so throughout this website, and I've said it since the day I got here.
What the wide world of fuck is wrong with that?

YOU are the one dropping the turds of emotion here, possum. You are arguing that the motive of these men was to intimidate, but the women who seek to limit their constitutional rights are, what? completely logical in claiming to be intimidated?

I don't have any evidence that your strawman in part 2 is accurate, but in any case NO -- a discussion around a restaurant table is in no way comparable with twenty people with guns outside the window. NO.

As for the logic of intimidation, see, agan, Aurora, Sandy Hook, DC, Powell, Oak Creek, Webster, Lancaster, Kileen, Binghamton, San Diego, Jacksonville, Pittsburgh, San Ysidro, Edmond, Stockton, Virginia Tech, Iowa City, Olivehurst, San Francisco, Garden City, Jonesboro. Atlanta, Fort Worth, Honolulu, Wakefield, Santee, Meridian, Red Lake, Salt Lake, Omaha, DeKalb, Fort Hood, Manchester, Austin, Seal Beach, Oakland, Minneapolis, Brookfield, Santa Monica, DC (again) Columbine...

YOU keep bringing up "children" and "loaded" for no purpose at all except to sway emotional opinion to your side.
How fucking disingenuous can you possibly be?

Once again -- what's 'disingenuous' here? The group has been described as "nuts". I would say bringing children into a cache of weapons for no other reason than to make a political point, qualifies them as "nuts". As for the emotion, you tell me what you'd be posting right now if one of those kids had gotten shot accidentally in a situation they didn't have to be placed in. You tell me, Ernie.

 

[Sunshine]

Thought you said I was the one being emotional...?



None of those compare to showing up with 19 other people pulling your penises... sorry, I mean guns out to show the women in the restaurant. What you describe there is defensive, not offensive.

Again, what they see from the restaurant window is a bunch of people arrive in the parking lot and start drawing guns. In a state where a sniper in Austin killed 17 and wounded 32, a state where 23 were killed in Killeen, your first thought in the moment isn't what's in the Constitution; your first thought is Aurora, Sandy Hook, DC, Powell, Oak Creek, Webster, Lancaster, Kileen, Binghamton, San Diego, Jacksonville, Pittsburgh, San Ysidro, Edmond, Stockton, Virginia Tech, Iowa City, Olivehurst, San Francisco, Garden City, Jonesboro. Atlanta, Fort Worth, Honolulu, Wakefield, Santee, Meridian, Red Lake, Salt Lake, Omaha, DeKalb, Fort Hood, Manchester, Austin, Seal Beach, Oakland, Minneapolis, Brookfield, Santa Monica, DC (again) Columbine and the like. It's survival.

Or did those events simply not happen?

How many penises does he have?

Pogo has just the one protruding from his neck.

A face lift will do that to you. And that hole in his forehead is his belly button~!

 

[Pogo]

Too many in this nation are brain washed into thinking that law abiding gun owners are not responsible people with using their firearms.
Where is the terror or threats in that picture?
Are they holding their guns in a threating way? NO!
Do they have the guns aimed at the protesters in the restaurant? NO!
Was there any arrests? NO!

People in this Country need to start using their heads about guns and not believe the anti gun people, who have talked the majority of this nation into believing that all guns are bad and anyone who has one is bad.

If the Women had used their heads and not their feelings, they would not have been so frightened or intimidated.

People of this Nation need to get it through their heads that Law abiding Citizens have the right to carry
their guns in the open.

How is showing your gun Bullying?
They are not even standing in a threating manor.
Now if they had pointed the guns, or would have stood in a threating manor, that would have been bullying and terrorizing.

There is a difference in a 'show of force' and a 'use of force.' Do you recall this picture of the Elian Gonzalez affair? Notice how the officers is pointing the gun, but finger is not on the trigger. The finger rests above on the stock or whatever that part of the gun is called. That is a 'show of force.' Not a 'use of force.'

Elián González affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No Elian González was one story I ignored completely, sorry. Hyped up stories about what happens to one person have never held any interest for me, so ...

Show of force versus use-- Sure there's a difference, and it corresponds to the difference between being intimidated by firepower and being physically wounded by it. You exercise caution when faced with the first so you can try to avoid the second. That's what the four women did.

 

[Pogo]

Marty; Ernie; Spoonman; Lonestar; BigReb; Pothead; Koshergrrr; Peach.. I count eight posters I'm trying to keep up with (good thing I'm a fast typist) but I think the points have been addressed. Important as the issue is, I've got other things to attend to, and I'm well aware that posters here will argue not because they believe in a position but just to argue (e.g. see the Thanksgiving thread where the poll runs 94 to 6 and yet they yammer on), so thank you all for interesting discussion, your points and your passion. It's all good.

A concession! It's about time!

Qualified with a compliment to himself, of course.

"Concession" to what?

Sunshine's here so that's nine posters I'm answering. Just saying there's only one of me so I can only do so much.

But I am observing that I'm getting nothing but the same old rehashed arguments with their questions unanswered and a lot of empty ad hominem about penises and face lifts, so that tells me something about who's armed with what.

I can't say I'm not flattered that it takes nine of you though...

 

[koshergrl]

Poor frodo.

 

[koshergrl]

You realize that makes you the extremist, right?

 

[Sunshine]

Marty; Ernie; Spoonman; Lonestar; BigReb; Pothead; Koshergrrr; Peach.. I count eight posters I'm trying to keep up with (good thing I'm a fast typist) but I think the points have been addressed. Important as the issue is, I've got other things to attend to, and I'm well aware that posters here will argue not because they believe in a position but just to argue (e.g. see the Thanksgiving thread where the poll runs 94 to 6 and yet they yammer on), so thank you all for interesting discussion, your points and your passion. It's all good.

A concession! It's about time!

Qualified with a compliment to himself, of course.

"Concession" to what?

Sunshine's here so that's nine posters I'm answering. Just saying there's only one of me so I can only do so much.

But I am observing that I'm getting nothing but the same old rehashed arguments with their questions unanswered and a lot of empty ad hominem about penises and face lifts, so that tells me something about who's armed with what.

I can't say I'm not flattered that it takes nine of you though...

O poor baby! Out classed by a sick old lady! Don'tcha just luv it!

 

[Pogo]

You realize that makes you the extremist, right?

Yeah I guess it does. And proud of it baby.

Hey, whatever it takes to speak up for what's right, doesn't matter what the numbers are.

OK I'm going back to work.

 

[koshergrl]

It isn't right to disarm the people. Ever. And it never has been.

 

[idb]

I'm just wondering, were those people there as a response to the meeting of the mothers or was it all a coincidence?

 

[koshergrl]

But there will always be extremists who clamor for it...

And there will always be armed Americans, and lots of them, who will refuse to disarm.

 

[Sunshine]

I'm just wondering, were those people there as a response to the meeting of the mothers or was it all a coincidence?

Doesn't matter. If open carry is legal in that state, they violated no law.

 

[regent]

When I was a kid about eight years old we used our hand pretending it was a gun, and as we we rode our make believe horses, we shot anything that moved, great fun. The children in the picture look like they have real guns and, in fact, some of those children looked kinda old. How old were those children in the picture?

 

[idb]

I'm just wondering, were those people there as a response to the meeting of the mothers or was it all a coincidence?

Doesn't matter. If open carry is legal in that state, they violated no law.

It does really.
OK that it's legal but if the intent was to intimidate then that's bound to be a polarising action.
It doesn't present a good image for their cause and their (presumed) argument that they represent law-abiding, reasonable, non-threatening families when their response is to turn up to a meeting of mothers with loaded weapons.

I suggest that there would be plenty of law-abiding, reasonable gun owners that would face-palm when they saw that.

 

[Pogo]

I'm just wondering, were those people there as a response to the meeting of the mothers or was it all a coincidence?

Doesn't matter. If open carry is legal in that state, they violated no law.

It does really.
OK that it's legal but if the intent was to intimidate then that's bound to be a polarising action.
It doesn't present a good image for their cause and their (presumed) argument that they represent law-abiding, reasonable, non-threatening families when their response is to turn up to a meeting of mothers with loaded weapons.

I suggest that there would be plenty of law-abiding, reasonable gun owners that would face-palm when they saw that.

Indeed. It plays right into the mothers' agenda.

When I was a kid about eight years old we used our hand pretending it was a gun, and as we we rode our make believe horses, we shot anything that moved, great fun. The children in the picture look like they have real guns and, in fact, some of those children looked kinda old. How old were those children in the picture?

Don't know if they say, but I remember those daze, and you can add cap guns, dart guns, even water pistols, and when you were done playing outside you came in and watched cowboys shoot up Indians and then later your parents watched cops shoot up robbers. And then you got more gun toys to emulate the cowboys and the cops.

There's no pattern there though....

 

[peach174]

When I was a kid about eight years old we used our hand pretending it was a gun, and as we we rode our make believe horses, we shot anything that moved, great fun. The children in the picture look like they have real guns and, in fact, some of those children looked kinda old. How old were those children in the picture?

I see only two children in the front and neither one is holding a gun.
The girl is holding her feet and the boy is sitting with his hands in his lap.