AggieDave 6 #26 January 31, 2010 QuoteThat seems an unnecessary response. Nope, it is a historically accurate response!--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 58 #27 January 31, 2010 QuoteQuote What is interesting is that gun owners from the first group seem to be kinda pissed off on the second group as well: Open carry is interesting... (I mean real, loaded weapon, legal open carry). There are some people in TX who want open carry laws. Some people say it will turn into the shootout at the OK corral, but I heard that about concealed carry back in the day and it never happened. So I don't buy it. I do think that open carrying an unloaded gun is stupid. But likely for different reasons than many. An unloaded weapon is as useful as a hammer. If I lived in that area, and knew of a place where this was happening, I might wear a hammer on my belt one day to go get coffee. Carrying an unloaded gun also makes the wearer used to the weapon being unloaded which is dangerous. Unloaded weapons are dangerous to the wearer. Some outlaw biker club members carry a ball-peen hammer in a sheath attached to their belt.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #28 January 31, 2010 QuoteQuoteI wouldn't say that those people are a danger, just that they may be ineffective if a threat presents its self. I guess we disagree. I think an untrained person with a loaded gun in a high stress situation IS a danger to themselves and others. the whole point of his post was that these guns will remain unloaded (hammers) because in the adrenaline charged situation, fine motor skills are difficult. That is why they must be trained repeatedly.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #29 January 31, 2010 Quote .... That is why they must be trained repeatedly. Understand. And that's what every responsible weapon owner is doing on a regular basis. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #30 January 31, 2010 Quote Maybe it's just me because I am weird but, I feel more comfortable around a citizen with his or her weapon openly displayed on their hip then a gang banger with his or her weapon hidden in their baggy clothes. I feel more comfortable around a citizen without a weapon. Seems like most of commenters are as well. And I really wonder why those "protesters" didn't go somewhere like East Oakland, Richmond or East Palo Alto - places where they might actually need their gun to protect themselves - and went instead to San Ramon, Livermore and Cupertino - places with relatively little crime.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 58 #31 January 31, 2010 Quote I feel more comfortable around a citizen without a weapon. Seems like most of commenters are as well. And I really wonder why those "protesters" didn't go somewhere like East Oakland, Richmond or East Palo Alto - places where they might actually need their gun to protect themselves - and went instead to San Ramon, Livermore and Cupertino - places with relatively little crime. Good point. it sounds like they were kind of chicken protesters. Less chance of any real confrontation maybe.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #32 January 31, 2010 Quote I feel more comfortable around a citizen without a weapon. Seems like most of commenters are as well. And I really wonder why those "protesters" didn't go somewhere like East Oakland, Richmond or East Palo Alto - places where they might actually need their gun to protect themselves - and went instead to San Ramon, Livermore and Cupertino - places with relatively little crime. I suspect they live there, and also there's little point in demonstrating in an area with few voters. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #33 January 31, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Your, dear friend, live in fear. Or why do you have to be armed from teeth to tooth? Why did you buy a gun, illegally no less, when you were in Florida? Were you afraid? I was not afraid walking Florida. I just wanted to buy that gun. To try if I get one, and it was working. Just trying to figure out why you're not afraid, but everyone else with guns must be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #34 January 31, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Your, dear friend, live in fear. Or why do you have to be armed from teeth to tooth? Why did you buy a gun, illegally no less, when you were in Florida? Were you afraid? I was not afraid walking Florida. I just wanted to buy that gun. To try if I get one, and it was working. Just trying to figure out why you're not afraid, but everyone else with guns must be. Try harder. We walk around unarmed and feel safe. That's enough for me. To be fair, there really is a weapon culture in the US which we old-fashioned Germans/Europeans do not understand. But, that's not the only difference between us. Keep your weapons, we'll try to keep them away from us as much as possible. Our youngsters do not need to grow up with a hand gun instead of a toy in thier hands. Looking forward visiting the US again in 2 months, I do not see any troubles ahead - I'll enjoy New York like always. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #35 February 1, 2010 Quote I suspect they live there, and also there's little point in demonstrating in an area with few voters. I don't think there are less voters in Richmond or East Oakland than in San Ramon. So I rather agree with RonD1120- they were kind of chicken protesters. It probably felt good to safely parade with a strapped gun in front of families with children where they knew they wouldn't have to use their gun. It might have worked completely different somewhere like East Oakland - and that was likely to be the reason they didn't go there. And why didn't they go to San Francisco - there seem to be quite a few neighborhoods which would benefit from such patrolling, and there is definitely more voters than in San Ramon?* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #36 February 1, 2010 QuoteAnd why didn't they go to San Francisco - there seem to be quite a few neighborhoods which would benefit from such patrolling, and there is definitely more voters than in San Ramon? Because they're not cops - they have no duty to 'patrol' anything.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #37 February 1, 2010 QuoteBecause they're not cops - they have no duty to 'patrol' anything. Neither they have a duty to "patrol" San Ramon - and they still went there. The way I see it is that if they walked around East Oakland, were approached by criminals, and one or more got hurt while others would load their guns and bring a criminal down, it would a) bring a lot of good publicity for gun owners and b) provided a poster child example why current laws might need alterations like allowing carrying a loaded gun. Instead they went to a little and safe San Ramon, where the obvious reaction would be pissed off moms with kids and multiple calls to 911. Gun owners now look pretty much like jerks who are bullying with their guns on hips around families (who have no idea whether someone's gun is loaded or not), and piss off local cops who have to follow those 911 calls instead of working on real crimes. You don't have to believe me - just read the comments, they are pretty obvious, and this is extremely negative publicity. I actually wonder if the second types of a gun owner - the one which "practically put up billboards of their ownership, practice, paranoia" EVER done anything good for the gun right movement?* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #38 February 1, 2010 QuoteQuoteBecause they're not cops - they have no duty to 'patrol' anything. Neither they have a duty to "patrol" San Ramon - and they still went there. They weren't patrolling THERE, either.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #39 February 1, 2010 QuoteThey weren't patrolling THERE, either. Indeed, they just went to piss off locals - who now think there gun laws in CA are too relaxed allowing such demonstrations of stupidity in public.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #40 February 1, 2010 QuoteQuoteThey weren't patrolling THERE, either. Indeed, they just went to piss off locals - who now think there gun laws in CA are too relaxed allowing such demonstrations of stupidity in public. No, they went there to make a political statement - pissing off pant-wetting hoplophobes was a bonus.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #41 February 1, 2010 QuoteNo, they went there to make a political statement And they made it - but not the kind of statement they expected. Indeed a lot of comments are something like "Need to carry big gun out in open = need to make up for some unseen inadequacy" and "pistol packin' = tiny penis"* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #42 February 1, 2010 QuoteQuoteNo, they went there to make a political statement And they made it - but not the kind of statement they expected. Indeed a lot of comments are something like "Need to carry big gun out in open = need to make up for some unseen inadequacy" and "pistol packin' = tiny penis" "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity”. - Sigmund Freud Sounds spot-on, for the panty-wetters.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #43 February 1, 2010 QuoteQuoteBecause they're not cops - they have no duty to 'patrol' anything. Neither they have a duty to "patrol" San Ramon - and they still went there. We know you don't approve of their actions or their stance. Duh. You seem to be glossing over the fact that the "public response" was also contrived. And you want to assert they should be spreading the method in every bad part of town - but this is a red herring with no relevance. BTW, don't be clueless. There are substantially fewer voters in Richmond than San Ramon. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stayhigh 2 #44 February 1, 2010 those bastards won't let dogs inside neither...Bernie Sanders for President 2016 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #45 February 1, 2010 Quote "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity”. - Sigmund Freud A simple search confirms that this quote is misattributed to Freud. Very lame!* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #46 February 1, 2010 Quote We know you don't approve of their actions or their stance. Duh. To recall some history, just a few month ago I likely wouldn't care. That's gun nuts who changed me that way. I wonder how many of those who now disapprove their actions (did you read the comments?) didn't really care a few months ago either? Quote You seem to be glossing over the fact that the "public response" was also contrived. And you want to assert they should be spreading the method in every bad part of town - but this is a red herring with no relevance. There is a obvious line between reasonable protesting and being grossly rude. A gay couple dressing up as a priest with attached strap-on and underage teen playing up sexual activity might also have been making a political statement protesting against increase in pedophilia in churches. But doing so inside a family church on Sunday would be just as gross as brandishing your unloaded guns in front of moms with kids. Quote BTW, don't be clueless. There are substantially fewer voters in Richmond than San Ramon. Richmond population is 99,216 (2000) San Ramon population is 44,722 (2000) Are you sure there are substantially fewer voters in Richmond?* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 0 #47 February 1, 2010 QuoteQuote We know you don't approve of their actions or their stance. Duh. To recall some history, just a few month ago I likely wouldn't care. That's gun nuts who changed me that way. I wonder how many of those who now disapprove their actions (did you read the comments?) didn't really care a few months ago either? Quote You seem to be glossing over the fact that the "public response" was also contrived. And you want to assert they should be spreading the method in every bad part of town - but this is a red herring with no relevance. There is a obvious line between reasonable protesting and being grossly rude. A gay couple dressing up as a priest with attached strap-on and underage teen playing up sexual activity might also have been making a political statement protesting against increase in pedophilia in churches. But doing so inside a family church on Sunday would be just as gross as brandishing your unloaded guns in front of moms with kids. Quote BTW, don't be clueless. There are substantially fewer voters in Richmond than San Ramon. Richmond population is 99,216 (2000) San Ramon population is 44,722 (2000) Are you sure there are substantially fewer voters in Richmond? Most likely yes..... population does not = amount of voters. I have my CCW and I do on occasion open carry. I have never had anyone scoff at it nor complain. Most cops just give me the "nod". I train with my weapon every week like a majority of those who open carry or have their CCW. Guns are NOT anti family in any way. It is actually a way I protect my family. I wonder how those that are against guns or open carry would feel if they were in a situation that a gun owner saved them because of some thug coming in to rob this place. George your post is like many of your previous posts.... out there.....Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #48 February 1, 2010 Quote To recall some history, just a few month ago I likely wouldn't care. That's gun nuts who changed me that way. Yeah, Kallend likes to talk about how he supports gun rights. But talk is exactly that and it's pretty easy to see through. Quote There is a obvious line between reasonable protesting and being grossly rude. A gay couple dressing up as a priest with attached strap-on and underage teen playing up sexual activity might also have been making a political statement protesting against increase in pedophilia in churches. But doing so inside a family church on Sunday would be just as gross as brandishing your unloaded guns in front of moms with kids. As this clearly shows. Quote Richmond population is 99,216 (2000) San Ramon population is 44,722 (2000) Are you sure there are substantially fewer voters in Richmond? basic study will show you that voting participation is higher with wealth, education, age. The registration rate in San Ramon is ~50% higher, and actual participation rate shows an even greater delta. Estimate of 2008 San Ramon pop is 49k. +10% Estimate of 2008 Richmond is 102k. +3% No real surprises here. Registered voters in Richmond, 1/29/09: 41,377 In San Ramon: 33,076. Votes cast in Nov 2008 election on Richmond Prop T: 30,036. Votes cast for San Ramon prop P, Q: 25391, 24693. So twice the population translates into just 20% more votes. Further hurting Richmond relevance is that the ratio of Dem:GOP is nearly 10:1. also notable: there are no Peet's coffees in the city of Richmond. No CPK either. Pretty much you have the Richmond Mall off I-80, and you have a little bit of retail at the far west end at Richmond Pt. If you didn't live there, you wouldn't bother to go there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #49 February 1, 2010 Quote That's gun nuts who changed me that way. and the so called "gun nuts" change me, but changed me the other way. So you and I basically cancel each other out. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #50 February 1, 2010 Quote Most likely yes..... population does not = amount of voters. A majority of Richmond population (40%) are blacks, so they have no issues with citizenship or so. Those of them who work are very likely to be union as well (and the majority of those who don't is likely to be on welfare - it's a relatively poor city). Just this 40% almost matches the whole San Ramon population. From what I've read, blacks tend to be pretty much politically active here in CA, hence was my question. Quote I have my CCW and I do on occasion open carry. I have never had anyone scoff at it nor complain. Most cops just give me the "nod". Do you open carry an unloaded gun (as those "protesters" do), or do you carry your regular loaded gun? Quote I wonder how those that are against guns or open carry would feel if they were in a situation that a gun owner saved them because of some thug coming in to rob this place. This is a good question. The only problem is that such situations seems to be extremely rare. Local reports suggest that at least some gun owners are only concerned about themselves, so the situation you describe looks quite unrealistic. On the other side, we have all those crimes committed when yet another gun owner went crazy and started shooting others (or into air) - and the number of such crimes seems to be much larger than the number of situations where an armed gun owner saved " those that are against guns or open carry".* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
