Open carry firearms.. Our 2nd amendment right!!

[Diuretic]

Just last night my wife rushed in from our back deck at midnight and told me that two men had just walked around the corner of the house and laughed at her when she told them to get the fuck off the property. I stormed out with my hand on my pistol grip behind my back and told them they had two seconds to turn around and leave or they'd be shot legally. I counted to "one" and they were already running.

They never even saw the gun.

Cops are for placing criminals in jail. Guns are for stopping criminals before they can act.

The second amendment took into account that throughout history, the most dangerous criminals have been government. Don't let them take it away from us. Gun control led to Stalinism, Maoists, and the Nazi regime in Germany.

We all know the history. The question is "How many of us are too fucking stupid or naive to stand up and prevent it from happening again?"

Gun control doesn't always lead to Stalinism/Maoism/Nazism. In fact it's entirely possible that the theories behind those systems preceded any notion of gun control. Anyway, my jurisdiction has gun control and it's not going nutso any time soon.

Sometimes it's useful to put an argument for something without a resort to hysterical claims.

Maybe your jurisdiction went "nutso" a long time ago and you just missed it.

I can tell you it goes nutso regularly!

It used to be a reasonably violent place back in the 19th Century despite it having the first organised police force in Australia (1838). It has quietened down considerably since then and it's pretty civilised but it does have its moments. For a population in the entire state of only 1.5m it can throw up some really weird events.

 

[Skull Pilot]

What happened at UVA?

sorry, Virginia Tech

 

[germanguy]

First, when my neighbour fucks my wife, I would get at my wife.

Man, what a neighborhood you live in.

But serious.

What you say about Nazi Germany does show, that you thankfully have not experienced how a dictatorship works. We had two of these in the last 70 years, so I know perhaps better.

The system worked far more subtle than tall men in leather-coats kicking in your front door 5 a.m, shouting guttural orders in German.

Imagine a Jew in 1933 and the following years in Germany

First the state explains, that from now on you are on the shit-list. Who cares you might say.
I am armed.

Then your children are excluded from sports in school.
Then it is made illegal, that you employ non-jews.
Then your children must go to a only-jewish school.
Then you are not allowed to marry non-jews. Married to a non-jew ? This will be an extra - tax. Also, your partner is treated like a jew.
Then making business outside Germany is banned for you.
A passport is denied.
Then you are not allowed to buy at non-jews, visit restaurants, bars and even park-benches are not for you. You must carry a yellow star, to be marked.
Then your business is "arianised" means you have to sell it to a nazi for nil.

This can be continued till finally you get a letter and show up at train-station so-and-so to get "evacuated to the east". Your ticket to the gas chambers, but you are not aware of this.

Mix now to this the fact, that the Gestapo had it´s ears everywhere. You were not able to tell who to trust and who was on your side. Even worse, helping you would bring the one to prison.
Also, the question to a citizen: "Are you on our side or an enemy of the state and no true patriot ?" can be very intimidating. Especially if there is only one right answer and severe punishment for the wrong one.

At no point a Gestapo Squad appeared at your door. But they took step by step away your rights and managed to make you very alone.
How to face this with a gun ?

There were incidents, when small resistance groups fought back, but this was quickly crushed with brute force.

In the GDR they were more sophisticated.

The all-present Staatssicherheit, the east-german secret police had hundreds of thousands informers. And they gathered information about anybody posing a possible threat.

There were different stages to get you along.

First you were always aware, that someone might listen to what you say and report it.
Then it was clear, that any opposition might get you in trouble.

First step was to let you know, that the state was unhappy with you. This was perhaps done by your boss during a little chat.

This was then upgraded step by step with hints and whispers, but at a point the Stasi started to get serious. Even then a little visit by two friendly men, explaining it would be very sorry to let your son not study, clever as he is. Just think about it, sir!.
And when they got bloody serious, they began to "dissolve" you as person.

Rumours started about you stealing or being a child molester. Someone had been in your house. You suddenly were unable to get tickets for your holiday trip (remember:all state owned).
Informers were planted around you, perhaps even your wife was forced into being one.
(Madam, with two nice children, you must do your duty as citizen. Imagine how it would be without them). Or your best friend. You never knew.
If you decided to flee to the west - good luck while getting over the wall.
If you asked to leave the country, they might have allowed you that, but without one of your children.

In both states it pretty ran down to the fact, that a single citizen, fighting for his rights became quickly a very unheard person of. And to go out on the streets you needed organization and communication, which was monitored.
Only when the grip became a litter looser in 1989 and it was clear, that the Soviets would not interfere, people took their chance.
And the East-Germans proved, that 70.000 unarmed on the street could overthrow a government. The then government deceided, that the troops were probably not to be trusted to massacre so many people, so they left it.
The chinese in used tanks on Tianmen-Square 1989, a mighty help firearms would have been.

Excellent job on educating everyone on what happened.. I do read, and was already aware of the majority of this. I have German roots, not that it matters here.. But really- no sarcasm meant- that was very well put.

I just think that NONE of that snowball effect would have happened in the first place, had the jews been armed, openly, as well as the polish and Germans.
I have lived in a dictatorship, also.. It just was not an entire country or actual King, but a man who thought he was king, and manipulated (tricked) the people around me to believe that it was me who had something wrong, and not him, until he finally almost dissolved my life. Also, if you don't think that governmental collusion happens here in the states, you are mistaken. I know several people who have fallen victim to collusion, and it is EXACTLY why we have lawyers and a strong justice system, to hold people accountable for their damaging methods involving corruption.
It should also be said that everyone has certain boundaries- a line, so to speak. Mine is much lower than the average joe's, in that I do not put up with anyone's shit, while some people are far more willing to just take it and take it and take it, until there is literally a giant wall between themselves and their freedoms.. If anything, I think that by NOT taking responsibility at maintaining one's personal freedom and well being, then THAT is the greatest act of corruption a person can experience. You can refer to this as "self mutilation", if you would like. I think that laying down like a doormat is absolutely the worst thing any person can do. I would rather die protecting my life, family, and property, and get a little media attention over the incident, than give those things freely..

Also, you must distinguish between police forces, which lack the training to use firearms in a military sense and the military.
Perhaps a SWAT-team could be seen as an equivalent to Specvial Forces, but here in Germany they still are not allowed to shoot to kill (well there are rare exceptions).

So personally I still think against a determined and well trained military unit in sizeable force (let´s say an armoured bataillon) a large mass of protestors, even armed with guns, would have a hard stand.

Your point here is practically moot, though, because of the rarity of instances when this actually happens. Granted, it happens here and there, but it is just not the big issue.
Besides, your argument, summed up, is that it makes no difference whether the populace is armed or not, that we are somehow powerless, either way, and have shown great strength in organized numbers, even when unarmed. I, for one, am not falling for that crap for a second. I think it is important for people to be able to show their strength in numbers, which happens regularly here in the US.. Being openly armed only shows more strength. It would certainly be enough to cause the armed forces to hesitate before sending in a battalion or two..
As many meth-heads as there seem to be here in the US, there are almost as many cooks. All that an interrupted protest would need would be a couple dozen mobile meth labs to kaboom the tanks out of mobility. Not that I have it all planned out or anything. I am certainly not planning any kind of hostile takeover, lol. My point is only that it would not be nearly as hard as it seems, to regain control, if that kind of action needed to be taken.

But I would not like to see this point proven.

It must be something deep-rooted, that Americans often see their personal freedom being connected with the right to carry a firearm.

And honest: what you write sometimes sounds rather blood-thirsty to me. This "don´t fuck with me I´m armed" attitude" I do not get.
But I do agree that a firearm is a good way to stress a point, even if you are not right.

kind regards
ze germanguy

That is the attitude, based solely on the fact that we can't walk ANYWHERE outside, in almost all places in the US, with a gun out in the open, unless we are in a hunting area and are actually hunting. Police and military CAN do this, and that is unfair, based on the Constitution. The government should not have rights that the people do not. The government serves US, we do not serve the government.

So there you go: master-servant relationship all summed up. You seem to believe that the government is an entity that should be served.. We don't. We think the opposite.

I do not consider that sentiment to be blood-thirsty, at all.

Hm. What you describe I would, although a sad and worrying experience, not describe as a dictatorship on a national level.

In states like these even the law is not on your side. So you can try to defend yourself alone, with some familiy or friends. But if the state decides to rip off your legal right to own property from you, he does so by law. No lawyer for you, no court to go to and no legal system which you can use.
So one way or the other, you are standing alone. You might shoot this out with half a dozen policemen, but not eternally, because you need access to a working infrastructure.
If this access is denied, your gun is helpless.

Anne Frank would have been able to fight her way out with some help from others.
The point still was, that she as being jewish had to hide herself. She was condemned by the Nazis to die. Practically she was nothing more than a fugitive.
So, the Nazis forced her to flee and to hide.

This is the point.

Perhaps the laws which separated blacks from whites in your country can give you an idea.
It was practically the same, but to a very much smaller degree.
How to shoot out this injustice, when the whole system is injust.
It started too change, when a lady decided, that sitting no one can possibly order her to not sit in the front of a bus. Would a gun be of help in this situation ?

But after reading closely what you have written, I see, that you and I have simply a different perception of the state.
The state I live in is mine. We are the people.
So every authority the state has, is checked on one side by the laws and the basic rights I have by being part of the people and also by the fact, that I am the source of it´s power.
Whatever means of opression are used, any dictatorship will fall, when people simply deceide to not accept it anymore. I say, that this is enough and the display or even the ownership of guns does not help a bit more.

You do not believe this. But then have a look at the last 30 years.
All oppresive states which have fallen have been either liberated from the outside, or they fell because even the most hard-assed Praetorians can not kill millions.

So, as you claim to be a free citizen because you have the right to own and carry a gun, is every citizen in countries without this right a slave ?

regrds
ze germanguy

ze germanguy

 

[Contumacious]

[So, as you claim to be a free citizen because you have the right to own and carry a gun, is every citizen in countries without this right a slave y

Don't you think the Afghans have done a good job keeping the Soviets and now the US from dominating their country?

.

 

[Emma]

What happened at UVA?

sorry, Virginia Tech

'k, thanks. I thought I'd missed something here.

I know about VT. I'm from the area.

 

[Varth Dader]

...The government should not have rights that the people do not. The government serves US, we do not serve the government.

Are you serious? Should I have the right to go arrest, try, and execute my neighbor too?

The government should have many rights that people do not.

 

[Emma]

...The government should not have rights that the people do not. The government serves US, we do not serve the government.

Are you serious? Should I have the right to go arrest, try, and execute my neighbor too?

The government should have many rights that people do not.

Just a point to you both, government doesn't have 'rights'.

 

[germanguy]

[So, as you claim to be a free citizen because you have the right to own and carry a gun, is every citizen in countries without this right a slave y

Don't you think the Afghans have done a good job keeping the Soviets and now the US from dominating their country?

.

Well, we are talking here about a full-scale war.
In general neither the US Army or the Soviets are trying to break into my house.

But serious: this is the best proof of my point.
The Soviets were fought by organized Afghans, stress upon organized. The question of owning guns is second to the fact, that those Afghans got their shit together and got organized. Guns then can be bought.

If the Afghans would not have organized themselves as Mujahedin, the Soviets would have killed them one after the other.
It is this what made the difference. But guns helped.

But back to our pretty middle-class lady from the US, JD_2B.
Doesn´t it occur to you, that this self-protection and guns-owning is pretty much about ownership ? The ideal is the citizen, who is defending himself, his property and his familiy.
I trust you, that those would carry their weapons in a responsible way. But can we ensure this ? What about the paranoid, the violent or the mad. Can I trust, that they not
misuse their guns when I am sitting with my kids in the park ?

I would rather not take that risk.

regards
ze germanguy

 

[JD_2B]

First, when my neighbour fucks my wife, I would get at my wife.

Man, what a neighborhood you live in.

But serious.

What you say about Nazi Germany does show, that you thankfully have not experienced how a dictatorship works. We had two of these in the last 70 years, so I know perhaps better.

The system worked far more subtle than tall men in leather-coats kicking in your front door 5 a.m, shouting guttural orders in German.

Imagine a Jew in 1933 and the following years in Germany

First the state explains, that from now on you are on the shit-list. Who cares you might say.
I am armed.

Then your children are excluded from sports in school.
Then it is made illegal, that you employ non-jews.
Then your children must go to a only-jewish school.
Then you are not allowed to marry non-jews. Married to a non-jew ? This will be an extra - tax. Also, your partner is treated like a jew.
Then making business outside Germany is banned for you.
A passport is denied.
Then you are not allowed to buy at non-jews, visit restaurants, bars and even park-benches are not for you. You must carry a yellow star, to be marked.
Then your business is "arianised" means you have to sell it to a nazi for nil.

This can be continued till finally you get a letter and show up at train-station so-and-so to get "evacuated to the east". Your ticket to the gas chambers, but you are not aware of this.

Mix now to this the fact, that the Gestapo had it´s ears everywhere. You were not able to tell who to trust and who was on your side. Even worse, helping you would bring the one to prison.
Also, the question to a citizen: "Are you on our side or an enemy of the state and no true patriot ?" can be very intimidating. Especially if there is only one right answer and severe punishment for the wrong one.

At no point a Gestapo Squad appeared at your door. But they took step by step away your rights and managed to make you very alone.
How to face this with a gun ?

There were incidents, when small resistance groups fought back, but this was quickly crushed with brute force.

In the GDR they were more sophisticated.

The all-present Staatssicherheit, the east-german secret police had hundreds of thousands informers. And they gathered information about anybody posing a possible threat.

There were different stages to get you along.

First you were always aware, that someone might listen to what you say and report it.
Then it was clear, that any opposition might get you in trouble.

First step was to let you know, that the state was unhappy with you. This was perhaps done by your boss during a little chat.

This was then upgraded step by step with hints and whispers, but at a point the Stasi started to get serious. Even then a little visit by two friendly men, explaining it would be very sorry to let your son not study, clever as he is. Just think about it, sir!.
And when they got bloody serious, they began to "dissolve" you as person.

Rumours started about you stealing or being a child molester. Someone had been in your house. You suddenly were unable to get tickets for your holiday trip (remember:all state owned).
Informers were planted around you, perhaps even your wife was forced into being one.
(Madam, with two nice children, you must do your duty as citizen. Imagine how it would be without them). Or your best friend. You never knew.
If you decided to flee to the west - good luck while getting over the wall.
If you asked to leave the country, they might have allowed you that, but without one of your children.

In both states it pretty ran down to the fact, that a single citizen, fighting for his rights became quickly a very unheard person of. And to go out on the streets you needed organization and communication, which was monitored.
Only when the grip became a litter looser in 1989 and it was clear, that the Soviets would not interfere, people took their chance.
And the East-Germans proved, that 70.000 unarmed on the street could overthrow a government. The then government deceided, that the troops were probably not to be trusted to massacre so many people, so they left it.
The chinese in used tanks on Tianmen-Square 1989, a mighty help firearms would have been.

Excellent job on educating everyone on what happened.. I do read, and was already aware of the majority of this. I have German roots, not that it matters here.. But really- no sarcasm meant- that was very well put.

I just think that NONE of that snowball effect would have happened in the first place, had the jews been armed, openly, as well as the polish and Germans.
I have lived in a dictatorship, also.. It just was not an entire country or actual King, but a man who thought he was king, and manipulated (tricked) the people around me to believe that it was me who had something wrong, and not him, until he finally almost dissolved my life. Also, if you don't think that governmental collusion happens here in the states, you are mistaken. I know several people who have fallen victim to collusion, and it is EXACTLY why we have lawyers and a strong justice system, to hold people accountable for their damaging methods involving corruption.
It should also be said that everyone has certain boundaries- a line, so to speak. Mine is much lower than the average joe's, in that I do not put up with anyone's shit, while some people are far more willing to just take it and take it and take it, until there is literally a giant wall between themselves and their freedoms.. If anything, I think that by NOT taking responsibility at maintaining one's personal freedom and well being, then THAT is the greatest act of corruption a person can experience. You can refer to this as "self mutilation", if you would like. I think that laying down like a doormat is absolutely the worst thing any person can do. I would rather die protecting my life, family, and property, and get a little media attention over the incident, than give those things freely..



Your point here is practically moot, though, because of the rarity of instances when this actually happens. Granted, it happens here and there, but it is just not the big issue.
Besides, your argument, summed up, is that it makes no difference whether the populace is armed or not, that we are somehow powerless, either way, and have shown great strength in organized numbers, even when unarmed. I, for one, am not falling for that crap for a second. I think it is important for people to be able to show their strength in numbers, which happens regularly here in the US.. Being openly armed only shows more strength. It would certainly be enough to cause the armed forces to hesitate before sending in a battalion or two..
As many meth-heads as there seem to be here in the US, there are almost as many cooks. All that an interrupted protest would need would be a couple dozen mobile meth labs to kaboom the tanks out of mobility. Not that I have it all planned out or anything. I am certainly not planning any kind of hostile takeover, lol. My point is only that it would not be nearly as hard as it seems, to regain control, if that kind of action needed to be taken.

But I would not like to see this point proven.

It must be something deep-rooted, that Americans often see their personal freedom being connected with the right to carry a firearm.

And honest: what you write sometimes sounds rather blood-thirsty to me. This "don´t fuck with me I´m armed" attitude" I do not get.
But I do agree that a firearm is a good way to stress a point, even if you are not right.

kind regards
ze germanguy

That is the attitude, based solely on the fact that we can't walk ANYWHERE outside, in almost all places in the US, with a gun out in the open, unless we are in a hunting area and are actually hunting. Police and military CAN do this, and that is unfair, based on the Constitution. The government should not have rights that the people do not. The government serves US, we do not serve the government.

So there you go: master-servant relationship all summed up. You seem to believe that the government is an entity that should be served.. We don't. We think the opposite.

I do not consider that sentiment to be blood-thirsty, at all.

Hm. What you describe I would, although a sad and worrying experience, not describe as a dictatorship on a national level.

In states like these even the law is not on your side. So you can try to defend yourself alone, with some familiy or friends. But if the state decides to rip off your legal right to own property from you, he does so by law. No lawyer for you, no court to go to and no legal system which you can use.
So one way or the other, you are standing alone. You might shoot this out with half a dozen policemen, but not eternally, because you need access to a working infrastructure.
If this access is denied, your gun is helpless.

They were not helpless to the Brits who rode the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria on over here. It is not helpless to the many people in Iraq who happen to be fighting OUR army, at this point, and apparently winning.

You keep acting like the US has no capability of communications. See, we fight like hell to KEEP our first amendment freedom of speech.. because after the first goes, then soon after, the second will go with ease. We will not allow this snowball to grow. We crush those little suckers, like the bugs they are.

Anne Frank would have been able to fight her way out with some help from others.
The point still was, that she as being jewish had to hide herself. She was condemned by the Nazis to die. Practically she was nothing more than a fugitive.
So, the Nazis forced her to flee and to hide.

This is the point.

Actually, Anne had a choice, and so did her family, and entire community. You want everyone to believe that Anne and all the other jews had no other choice but to hide until found and killed, but that is not reality. Oh sure, that was the easiest choice, when the shit finally hit the fan, but it was not their only choice.
People are capable of overcoming adversity, in the face of potentially deadly situations, if they believe in themselves and are crafty. Harriet Tubman freed the slaves this way. The underground railroad was a simple, but well executed and well thought out chain of households who would hang their quilts on a certain side of the house, which was really like a wind-vane- a guide in the general direction of the safet route to the next safehouse. Those songs that they sang, like "Jimmy Crack Corn", for one.. were used as codes to inform the people joining where they were headed, and even what dangers or landscapes were ahead of them.
Where there's a will, there IS a way. History has proven this exponential times.

Perhaps the laws which separated blacks from whites in your country can give you an idea.
It was practically the same, but to a very much smaller degree.
How to shoot out this injustice, when the whole system is injust.
It started too change, when a lady decided, that sitting no one can possibly order her to not sit in the front of a bus. Would a gun be of help in this situation ?

Only if her life was at stake.. Which it was not. But, yes- blacks having the ability to open carry, as they said, "separate but equal", I think that the whites would have resultedly been a little less oppressive towards blacks as a whole.
Of course, the blacks clearly would not have had this right, and with whites open carrying, and blacks not being allowed to have guns at all, then I suppose it would have taken a white person ordering another white person to renig on their front of the bus seat, and history would still have changed, eventually. Or, God Forbid, nobody would have done anything and there would have simply been another civil war over it, which, by the way, has not quite ended, yet, in the US of A.
Anyways this all leads to the power of hiring an attorney, and again as I said before- the will to realize what is rightly yours, and taking it freely. Rosa Parks did just that, and YES I do believe that having the ability to open carry a firearm would never have led to her having to sit in the back of the damned bus in the first place.
See this is where it gets messed up- a cop can barge into my home, and as long as he is wearing a badge of some sort, he is allowed to do this, assuming it is in the scope of his "duties", which we all know cops lie and cheat their asses off.. and totally pump me full of lead, if they want to, because that is the law. I, on the other hand, can NOT enter a cop's home, even in good faith, with civilian arrest capabilities, with my gun up at the ready, because THAT is somehow or other, by law, a fucking CRIME.
Now that is bullshit. That is what I am fighting here. If the government can do it, then since they serve us, then so shall I be able to also. To say otherwise is absolutely ludicris.

But after reading closely what you have written, I see, that you and I have simply a different perception of the state.
The state I live in is mine. We are the people.
So every authority the state has, is checked on one side by the laws and the basic rights I have by being part of the people and also by the fact, that I am the source of it´s power.
Whatever means of opression are used, any dictatorship will fall, when people simply deceide to not accept it anymore. I say, that this is enough and the display or even the ownership of guns does not help a bit more.

Well, I will decide not to take it anymore, while I still have the means to fight back adequately.. You can use your little stun guns and slingshots, but I will carry my pistol, thanks but no thanks to your fear of guns in all this. My gun, my life. If some asshole breaks into my house and wants to dance, he will not be dancing long. I dont give a shit how many buddies he has with him. I keep spare ammo.

You do not believe this. But then have a look at the last 30 years.
All oppresive states which have fallen have been either liberated from the outside, or they fell because even the most hard-assed Praetorians can not kill millions.

Are you actually a holocaust denier??? OMFG..

So, as you claim to be a free citizen because you have the right to own and carry a gun, is every citizen in countries without this right a slave ?

regrds
ze germanguy

Now that is being a bit extreme, making that kind of comparison.

Certainly people who don't have guns are not always "slaves" as a result.. But, even still, they certainly give up their roles as the masters.

It also takes MORE BLIND faith in your government, or that "outside help" you refer to, to live with any semblance of sanity, once you give up your arms.

Look at Scotland, and even Australia! Now, pointy kitchen knives will be outlawed.
Do they know that table legs can kill, too? Rope? Anything involving a 110 watt electrical appliance/ outlet? What are they going to do.. outlaw ELECTRICAL CORDS???

I respect that you are afraid of guns or death by violence, or whatever.. My mom was from Scotland, and was brainwashed to be the same way.. You HAVE to understand this- GUNS DO NOT KILL PEOPLE. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. Flat out!!! It is just a NECESSITY for a civilian to have a gun, as long as their governmental servants have them, as well.


If that is not the bottom line here, I don't know what is.

 

[JD_2B]

Well, we are talking here about a full-scale war.
In general neither the US Army or the Soviets are trying to break into my house.

But serious: this is the best proof of my point.
The Soviets were fought by organized Afghans, stress upon organized. The question of owning guns is second to the fact, that those Afghans got their shit together and got organized. Guns then can be bought.

If the Afghans would not have organized themselves as Mujahedin, the Soviets would have killed them one after the other.
It is this what made the difference. But guns helped.

Without those guns, the Afghans would have LOST. Plain and simple.

But back to our pretty middle-class lady from the US, JD_2B.
Doesn´t it occur to you, that this self-protection and guns-owning is pretty much about ownership ? The ideal is the citizen, who is defending himself, his property and his familiy.

No.. It isn't all about that.. It is about having as many rights as the government has- Our government has more rights than we do. They have full immunity for a lot of criminal activity, torts, etc.. And they get to carry their guns around openly, and can talk shit to whomever they want, however they want. I was joking around one day when my good friend was leaving her abusive boyfriend, and moving her stuff out. One of the county sheriffs was there (very small town, it was) and I jokingly (laughing out loud, obvious joking) said that he could always shoot the dude's tires out, as he came into town, lol. Well this sheriff said "I should shoot your big toe for even saying that", and laughed also, but his was a much more sinister laugh. I (nervously laughing) asked him why he said that, and he ignored me. My friend said that I should not ask him any more questions or talk to him. Yikes. I also have a buddy on facebook who is a local sheriff in the county I currently reside in, and he is CONSTANTLY talking about going around shooting off some dirtballs.. And have you seen all the videos with cops shooting someone, tasing someone, or beating some poor helpless person who didn't deserve it, down to a pulp? Ever heard of Rodney King?
Cops are sick fucks in the States, man. For that small fact, I will keep my gun.

I trust you, that those would carry their weapons in a responsible way. But can we ensure this ? What about the paranoid, the violent or the mad. Can I trust, that they not
misuse their guns when I am sitting with my kids in the park ?

I would rather not take that risk.

regards
ze germanguy

No there is no guarantee of that. That is why I call for open carry to be permitted, without prejudice. If some idiot walked onto your kid's park, and can see that you and about three other parents all have guns, do you really think he is going to continue being an idiot, and start swinging his piece around, aiming it at people??

There is this story of a fucking lunatic dude in a Wal Mart, who was going around cutting people with a blade of some sort (I think it was a knife, but whatever) just slicing people in the arm, leg, wherever he could hit.. and some old lady pulled out her little old lady gun, and pointed it right at the guy and shouted "You feeling lucky punk??" LMAO!! I swear it is a true story. Nobody was seriously hurt, either. The man was brought to jail and the injured people were all fine. But this is a classic (hilariously funny) story about how sometimes even a person without a gun can go around scaring the shit out of people.. And a gun DID help.

I believe strongly in vigilante justice. Thankfully, I live in a state that is very liberal in allowing this type of activity. Here, we can shoot to kill anyone trying to jack our cars, or come into the house, with the reason to believe they are there to inflict harm on you. You don't even have to see their gun. We have what is known as the "Stand Your Ground" doctrine, here, which also applies in public places, to protect others.
I used to live in Colorado, too, which is also known as the "Make my day" state, because if anyone enters your home for any reason, without permission, you can shoot them, and kill them, and the only explanation you need for it, is that they entered your home without permission. Some lady out there killed like five people, and never got into any trouble at all, but was ordered to go into therapy, for a certain period of time, just to be sure she wasn't a nutjob.

I like my state, lol.. =) The only thing I would change is that concealed carry with permits went to open carry, without prejudice to whomever owns and carries the weapons. I know it is not the safest route- but I do not care. Even people who have a criminal past, and are felons, etc, should have the right to protect their families, and stand their ground. Too many people are going to jail for fucking firearm possession charges and weed. Its dumb, and the two STUPIDEST reasons our jails house 25% of the imprisoned people in the world. Funny thing- we only have 5% of the worlds entire population in the US.

So, yes a gun is definitely necessary. =)

 

[Contumacious]

What about the paranoid, the violent or the mad. Can I trust, that they not misuse their guns when I am sitting with my kids in the park ?

My point precisely.

Adolf Hitler was paranoid, violent and mad. He incinerated ALIVE 6,000,000 Jews.

From my cold dead hands

 

[germanguy]

What about the paranoid, the violent or the mad. Can I trust, that they not misuse their guns when I am sitting with my kids in the park ?

My point precisely.

Adolf Hitler was paranoid, violent and mad. He incinerated ALIVE 6,000,000 Jews.

From my cold dead hands

Yep, single handed - lol.

Imagine, there were about 25 attempts (I know of) to kill this guy. Probably even more.
From suicide bombing attempts, time-bombs, several tried to shoot him down while passing on the street. He was sometimes lucky, but most of the time well-protected.

The only attempt which came close was Operation Valkyrie, and this was carefully planned by some high-ranking officers. Failed as well.

But still I do not know, if everybody is carrying a gun, whom to trust and who is having a little anger problem. So I personally prefer at least to prevent people from running around armed. The arsenal you keep at home I do not care of. But at least do not carry it around.

And just to enrage the guys from the NRA:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsN0FCXw914[/ame]

And about Hitler he said this, I think is at least noteworthy:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bk_pHZmn5QM[/ame]

regards
ze germanguy

 

[germanguy]

Well, we are talking here about a full-scale war.
In general neither the US Army or the Soviets are trying to break into my house.

But serious: this is the best proof of my point.
The Soviets were fought by organized Afghans, stress upon organized. The question of owning guns is second to the fact, that those Afghans got their shit together and got organized. Guns then can be bought.

If the Afghans would not have organized themselves as Mujahedin, the Soviets would have killed them one after the other.
It is this what made the difference. But guns helped.

Without those guns, the Afghans would have LOST. Plain and simple.

But back to our pretty middle-class lady from the US, JD_2B.
Doesn´t it occur to you, that this self-protection and guns-owning is pretty much about ownership ? The ideal is the citizen, who is defending himself, his property and his familiy.

No.. It isn't all about that.. It is about having as many rights as the government has- Our government has more rights than we do. They have full immunity for a lot of criminal activity, torts, etc.. And they get to carry their guns around openly, and can talk shit to whomever they want, however they want. I was joking around one day when my good friend was leaving her abusive boyfriend, and moving her stuff out. One of the county sheriffs was there (very small town, it was) and I jokingly (laughing out loud, obvious joking) said that he could always shoot the dude's tires out, as he came into town, lol. Well this sheriff said "I should shoot your big toe for even saying that", and laughed also, but his was a much more sinister laugh. I (nervously laughing) asked him why he said that, and he ignored me. My friend said that I should not ask him any more questions or talk to him. Yikes. I also have a buddy on facebook who is a local sheriff in the county I currently reside in, and he is CONSTANTLY talking about going around shooting off some dirtballs.. And have you seen all the videos with cops shooting someone, tasing someone, or beating some poor helpless person who didn't deserve it, down to a pulp? Ever heard of Rodney King?
Cops are sick fucks in the States, man. For that small fact, I will keep my gun.

I trust you, that those would carry their weapons in a responsible way. But can we ensure this ? What about the paranoid, the violent or the mad. Can I trust, that they not
misuse their guns when I am sitting with my kids in the park ?

I would rather not take that risk.

regards
ze germanguy

No there is no guarantee of that. That is why I call for open carry to be permitted, without prejudice. If some idiot walked onto your kid's park, and can see that you and about three other parents all have guns, do you really think he is going to continue being an idiot, and start swinging his piece around, aiming it at people??

There is this story of a fucking lunatic dude in a Wal Mart, who was going around cutting people with a blade of some sort (I think it was a knife, but whatever) just slicing people in the arm, leg, wherever he could hit.. and some old lady pulled out her little old lady gun, and pointed it right at the guy and shouted "You feeling lucky punk??" LMAO!! I swear it is a true story. Nobody was seriously hurt, either. The man was brought to jail and the injured people were all fine. But this is a classic (hilariously funny) story about how sometimes even a person without a gun can go around scaring the shit out of people.. And a gun DID help.

I believe strongly in vigilante justice. Thankfully, I live in a state that is very liberal in allowing this type of activity. Here, we can shoot to kill anyone trying to jack our cars, or come into the house, with the reason to believe they are there to inflict harm on you. You don't even have to see their gun. We have what is known as the "Stand Your Ground" doctrine, here, which also applies in public places, to protect others.
I used to live in Colorado, too, which is also known as the "Make my day" state, because if anyone enters your home for any reason, without permission, you can shoot them, and kill them, and the only explanation you need for it, is that they entered your home without permission. Some lady out there killed like five people, and never got into any trouble at all, but was ordered to go into therapy, for a certain period of time, just to be sure she wasn't a nutjob.

I like my state, lol.. =) The only thing I would change is that concealed carry with permits went to open carry, without prejudice to whomever owns and carries the weapons. I know it is not the safest route- but I do not care. Even people who have a criminal past, and are felons, etc, should have the right to protect their families, and stand their ground. Too many people are going to jail for fucking firearm possession charges and weed. Its dumb, and the two STUPIDEST reasons our jails house 25% of the imprisoned people in the world. Funny thing- we only have 5% of the worlds entire population in the US.

So, yes a gun is definitely necessary. =)

Got your point.

So there is definitely a big difference between your state and mine.
Killing someone at your own property here happens rather rarely. If I would do so, the incident would go to court and if I killed without my life being threatened, I would get quite a sentence. Selfdefense is certainly allowed, but killing without being it a life-threatening situation would get you in trouble.
Also, as arms not that in circulation as in the US, you can rather expect, that a burglar in your home is unarmed. Also, most criminals are aware of the fact, that even a simple street robbery will be sentenced far more harshly if a gun is found at you. This than is mostly considered as armed robbery, which gets you some extra-years.

In my town, which has about half a million people, I have never experienced anything like the use of guns.

You can pretty much expect, that guns are used only by the hard-assed criminals only. Russian Mafia etc.
I would not fuck around, even if armed, with a veteran from Chechnya, who simply is far more experienced in killing than I am.
But the two of us would not meet, so I leave this to better trained people.

So, I can still expect, that in a town like mine, that the ones who are armed are in general policemen and I trust them to do their job properly.

In a case like that of the old lady you have a point. But I have not experienced one like that here.
And in most cases, if it is reported that a gun or a knive is in the play, the police arrives really quick and in force. So the words "knife" or "firearm" really alarms people and especially the police.

In regard of the said deputy, I think you should vote the Sheriff out of office. Actually not a bad thing to vote for a Sheriff, but I suppose they can be, if in small towns, quite amateurish.
A policemen in my country would be deeply in the shit threatening people like that. It is that our police forces are all, without any exception, full-time professionals. I rather doubt, that you send a deputy from a little town for three years to a police academy. So all policemen we have here are not only fully trained, but restarined and monitored by a bureaucratic aparatus, which safeguards that not a single policemen behaves for long time in a threatening and dangerous way. It happens, but it will not last long.
In Germany every action a policemen takes against a citizen must be done so according the existing laws and regulations. And these actions must stand in court. If a policemen would do a stunt like your sheriff, he would be at minimum suspended or would loose his job.

Also, the point you stated is vigilante justice.
As said before, perhaps when the West was settled, this helped. So therefore there must be a strong sentiment left, that police, the Sheriff or Courts were of no much use or even not there when needed.

We here pretty much more trust our institutions. Also, I firmly believe, that you either have anarchy, where people settle things all by themselves, or the state owns the monopole in using force. In the latter case I more have the chance that the use of force is regulated, controlled and overseen by courts.

Also, incidents as you stated with the guy in a supermarket are very rare here, so I have not spent a minute to wish having a gun.

So, as I more believe in our system of law enforcement that you do (and the number of people we keep in prison is far lower than in US), I do not see the need in vigilante justice.

I just imagine a person in a supermarket or a street café carrying a gun open.
People here would go nuts, when realizing it´s a life gun. Police would arrive and ask for your permit to even have this gun and you would be fined.
But mostly the sentiment would be that you disturb public order and form a threat to surrounding people.
A policeman carrying a gun in open simply has the instrument to do his job at hand. At least it is what people see here.

You obviously do not, so we may agree to disagree in this.

regards
ze germanguy

 

[germanguy]

Forgot it:
Happy Thanksgiving everybody on the other side of the pond.
Should be a bank holiday here as well, would come handy now !

regards
ze germanguy

 

[The Rabbi]

I just imagine a person in a supermarket or a street café carrying a gun open.
People here would go nuts, when realizing it´s a life gun. Police would arrive and ask for your permit to even have this gun and you would be fined.
But mostly the sentiment would be that you disturb public order and form a threat to surrounding people.

Yeah that's the difference between a free state like TN and communist workers paradises like Germany and NY.
In TN people carry often, sometimes openly. Really it seldom causes any problem. Nor should it. Any more than people driving a car. Or walking on the sidewalk. Or exercising any other right they have.
An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I just imagine a person in a supermarket or a street café carrying a gun open.
People here would go nuts, when realizing it´s a life gun. Police would arrive and ask for your permit to even have this gun and you would be fined.
But mostly the sentiment would be that you disturb public order and form a threat to surrounding people.

Yeah that's the difference between a free state like TN and communist workers paradises like Germany and NY.
In TN people carry often, sometimes openly. Really it seldom causes any problem. Nor should it. Any more than people driving a car. Or walking on the sidewalk. Or exercising any other right they have.
An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

Rabbi,
You are really an F'n idiot. You're a chicken hawk, and a punk coward afraid to leave home without it (a gun) and the consequence of your having to shot and kill another human being bothers you not - it probably is the only thing that gives you a hard on.

 

[Missourian]

I just imagine a person in a supermarket or a street café carrying a gun open.
People here would go nuts, when realizing it´s a life gun. Police would arrive and ask for your permit to even have this gun and you would be fined.
But mostly the sentiment would be that you disturb public order and form a threat to surrounding people.

Yeah that's the difference between a free state like TN and communist workers paradises like Germany and NY.
In TN people carry often, sometimes openly. Really it seldom causes any problem. Nor should it. Any more than people driving a car. Or walking on the sidewalk. Or exercising any other right they have.
An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

Rabbi,
You are really an F'n idiot. You're a chicken hawk, and a punk coward afraid to leave home without it (a gun) and the consequence of your having to shot and kill another human being bothers you not - it probably is the only thing that gives you a hard on.

If you can't attack the message, malign the messenger.

I also never leave the house without my gun.

Sometimes I open carry and sometime I carry concealed, it's never been a problem here either way.

 

[sealybobo]

I just imagine a person in a supermarket or a street café carrying a gun open.
People here would go nuts, when realizing it´s a life gun. Police would arrive and ask for your permit to even have this gun and you would be fined.
But mostly the sentiment would be that you disturb public order and form a threat to surrounding people.

Yeah that's the difference between a free state like TN and communist workers paradises like Germany and NY.
In TN people carry often, sometimes openly. Really it seldom causes any problem. Nor should it. Any more than people driving a car. Or walking on the sidewalk. Or exercising any other right they have.
An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

I can't wait till all these plants that moved down south to escape unions end up leaving for cheaper foreign labor and leave your thriving middle class communities highly unemployed like happened in Detroit when we outsourced auto manufacturing. It happened back in LA too. History repeats itself.

Anyways, you will find out why guy rights are limited. Sure, in the country you can carry because everyone knows your name. But that kind of stuff can't happen in the big cities.

You'd be like Crocodile Dundee. Coming in with your big machetti.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yeah that's the difference between a free state like TN and communist workers paradises like Germany and NY.
In TN people carry often, sometimes openly. Really it seldom causes any problem. Nor should it. Any more than people driving a car. Or walking on the sidewalk. Or exercising any other right they have.
An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

Rabbi,
You are really an F'n idiot. You're a chicken hawk, and a punk coward afraid to leave home without it (a gun) and the consequence of your having to shot and kill another human being bothers you not - it probably is the only thing that gives you a hard on.

If you can't attack the message, malign the messenger.

I also never leave the house without my gun.

Sometimes I open carry and sometime I carry concealed, it's never been a problem here either way.

With any justice, one day you and rabbi will have a minor traffic accident and shot each other.

 

[Missourian]

Rabbi,
You are really an F'n idiot. You're a chicken hawk, and a punk coward afraid to leave home without it (a gun) and the consequence of your having to shot and kill another human being bothers you not - it probably is the only thing that gives you a hard on.

If you can't attack the message, malign the messenger.

I also never leave the house without my gun.

Sometimes I open carry and sometime I carry concealed, it's never been a problem here either way.

With any justice, one day you and rabbi will have a minor traffic accident and shot each other.

Your idea of Justice is wishing injury on two law abiding citizens, carrying firearms in accordance with federal, state and local laws, regulations and statutes, simply because you disagree with the law of the land.

Very telling.