"Stolen gun at Walmart causes panic"

Last edited:
Imagine how badly that could have gone if (assuming it wasn't) the gun was hot. All that fumbling around and then handing it from guy to guy. OMG!
 
Bailey Boat said:
Obviously the guy wasn't as "concealed" as he thought since the other guy saw it under his jacket and took his moronic actions..
Click to expand...
The 'hero' noticed the armed citizen putting the holstered gun IWB and covering it up when in parking lot as he exited his car.
He then followed the man inside and jumped him, taking the gun away. He repeated he was concealed permit holder.
Imagine if he jumped an off duty officer with backup handgun? Would have ended bad.
 
Last edited:
S4f said:
...but the question arises how do you how do separate the ones who are open carrying irresponsibley, to the ones that can't afford a permit but are try to exercise their right to protect their selves and family.
Click to expand...

My answer to this question is "I don't".

I'm more concerned with the individual's demonstrated behavior. We all know there are plenty of well dressed and well equipped jack*sses out there. Behavior is what I'm interested in.
 
Stout said:
Should I wonder why people who OC don't use retention holsters or will that cause a flame war?
Click to expand...
Or, you know, have one ounce of situational awareness. Nobody gets with 5 to 6 feet of me without my noticing and being on high guard.

Honestly, I look at the average gun show customer bumping into people and tables, whacking the muzzle of their rifle into anything within a 3 foot radius of themselves, and I wonder if they are even aware of where their body ends and the rest of humanity's reality begins.
 
chiefjason said:
So we can't OC because people don't like guns. We should CC.

But people that don't like guns don't like CC.

So we shouldn't CC?

And when did we start deciding what we do based on what other people don't like?
Click to expand...
I agree with you completely I got a conceal carry but most of the time I open carry not because I have to because I prefer to be able to get to my gun without having to go into my pocket or elsewhere and not have to worry if I'm dragging a bunch of crap out with it. I only got a conceal carry because of my wearing a jacket in the winter and not wanting to be caught concealing without the permit. My oldman raised me to always be aware of my surroundings as a kid. I've only had one person attempt to grab at my gun while being open they regretted it about 1/2 a second after they tried as they got popped in the jaw,I realized who they were and they were apologizing and of course grabbing their jaw. So yeah I think if a person wants to OC then more power to them. I've got way more in favor than not.
 
While I think OC is dumb, I would never support a law banning it. Same with bump stocks. Just throwing that out there because I read so many comments be ding dongs going on about how you dont "need" this or that gun related item. You don't "need" 200hp under that hood either. 50hp willl get you there just fine.
 
I don't OC as I'm 6'2" and 230lbs and try to blend in as well as a large guy can, so its CC only for me. I'm not opposed to others open carrying responsibly but I always think of our splendid "Going Armed to the Terror.." statute and how the snowflakes could make that mean just about anything these days.
 
I'll repeat what I said in a fb S&W Shield group.
OC makes you a target for a crackhead that wants to trade your gun for a bag of dope. Having said that, whenever I see an open carrier, I watch his/her 6.
 
Bailey Boat said:
Hell, I ain't skeert I'll say it, OC does not reflect on the gun community in a favorable way. There, it's out in the open.
I have over heard comments made by people when they see someone OC'ing and their not good. One woman in Wal Mart was on her way to find a manager and there was a guy that called the OC'er a "stupid, careless idiot"....
Get a CC if possible, if not leave it at home..... Flame on!!!
Click to expand...
And we care what people think or say? When did that start?
 
S4f said:
my post can't kill, impact the public negatively to do damage to the cause , only piss off the most fevered loyalist it seems , as for the pay a fee to post you'll see charter member under my screen name it's how I show my support for the sight and cause, and some times we are our own worst enemy, that sword is double edged and cuts both ways, repeatedly typing shall not be infringed upon doesn't mean you're right, it just means you can spell shall not be infringed upon
Click to expand...
For real? Where were you born?
Undoubtedly somewhere without a constitution.
 
Ultimately, the Second protects our Right not only to keep arms, but bear them as well.

There’s no caveat for open or concealed. In fact, when it was written, pretty much everyone open carried -visible arms were simply a normal part of life.

Open carry helps normalize the idea of guns as everyday tools that everyday men and women carry.

It allows people a fuller exercise of their Right to bear arms without paying the Crown for the privilege.

We can argue the tactical merits of open vs concealed,the likelihood of being a target or not.

But to argue against open carry is nothing more than a “I support the Second Amendment, but” statement.

I like this!!!

R
 
If you'll read my post, it was more a how to educate the bubba's than to stop it completely, when I stated I was torn ,when I see a numb nuts open carrying, I think that guy doesn't even need to have a gun, but now ive been educated by you guys that if it protected by the Constitution it can't be wrong,
I didn't know so many people here supported, stuff like blm , antifa, and the list goes on , cause as we know if its protected by the Constitution then wouldn't it be unpatriotic to speak out against it
 
S4f said:
If you'll read my post, it was more a how to educate the bubba's than to stop it completely, when I stated I was torn ,when I see a numb nuts open carrying, I think that guy doesn't even need to have a gun, but now ive been educated by you guys that if it protected by the Constitution it can't be wrong,
I didn't know so many people here supported, stuff like blm , antifa, and the list goes on , cause as we know if its protected by the Constitution then wouldn't it be unpatriotic to speak out against it
Click to expand...

Well yeah, this country was founded on the premise that all Men are Created Equal, that each of us are endowed by Our Creator with certain unalienable Rights.

It's kind of fundamental to the original intent of the Republic. So in that regard, if you advocate for the abridgement, infringement, or violation of the Rights of Man for no other reason than you disagree with someone, then yeah, that's unpatriotic and quite Toryist my scarlet-clad friend.
 
SPM said:
Well yeah, this country was founded on the premise that all Men are Created Equal, that each of us are endowed by Our Creator with certain unalienable Rights.

It's kind of fundamental to the original intent of the Republic. So in that regard, if you advocate for the abridgement, infringement, or violation of the Rights of Man for no other reason than you disagree with someone, then yeah, that's unpatriotic and quite Toryist my scarlet-clad friend.
Click to expand...
Ok if we're gonna call name's the first thing I'd like to say is pony up the 20 bucks to become a member my freeloading friend and that way when you drag out your soap box youre supporting the forum, open carry is state by state and I'm not infringing on anyone's rights , I said education when a kid don't won't to go school do you ok education is a bad thing you don't have to go. Or like say man/min sentencing works There are Caveat s to everything ,
 
S4f said:
Ok if we're gonna call name's the first thing I'd like to say is pony up the 20 bucks to become a member my freeloading friend and that way when you drag out your soap box youre supporting the forum, open carry is state by state and I'm not infringing on anyone's rights , I said education when a kid don't won't to go school do you ok education is a bad thing you don't have to go. Or like say man/min sentencing works There are Caveat s to everything ,
Click to expand...

What is the caveat to all Men being Created Equal?
 
SPM said:
What is the caveat to all Men being Created Equal?
Click to expand...
When. The founding fathers wrote that even they didnt believe it . Look I get that somewhere you studied the Constitution at great lengths and you just love to show people that , I could set here all night and Google answers, but its a game I chose not to play,if you want to beat people over the head with the Constitution try politics
 
S4f said:
When. The founding fathers wrote that even they didnt believe it . Look I get that somewhere you studied the Constitution at great lengths and you just love to show people that , I could set here all night and Google answers, but its a game I chose not to play,if you want to beat people over the head with the Constitution try politics
Click to expand...

First, we're talking original intent, which is the Declaration of Independence. The Bill of Rights, of which the Second is a part, meant to codify restrictions on government power to protect the original intent of these United States.

Second, the Founders understood quite well and were keenly aware that chattel slavery was incompatible with the ideals espoused in the Declaration, recognized it was the biggest criticism it would face, and agreed to simply not bring it up (it was a big reason why the grievances related to slavery and the slave trade were stricken from that section entirely). Their failure to live up to it fully doesn't change that self evident truth any more than our never perfectly living up to it does. They, like us, are human.

Lastly, I don't argue this stuff to impress anyone with the breadth of my knowledge. I am by no means a master legal theorist, but I have read and continue to read the documents as well as the arguments for and against in order to better understand these principles upon which our ancestors established this Republic.

I argue it not to satisfy my ego, but because the vast ignorance of those principles by the majority of my countrymen is responsible for nearly every ill that plagues our Nation, from Obamacare and the Welfare state to mass warrantless surveillance and the police state.

The fact that you're so comfortable in your ignorance or dismiss the Constitution entirely makes you part of the problem - and a $20 membership in the forum doesn't "support the cause" enough to make up for that lack of knowledge and understanding of the principles upon which a Free Society remains so.
 
Last edited:
Threads like this are why i never post in this fine forum.
Been a member since day one, check my join date and the almighty post count.
If we allow ourselves to be destroyed from within our ranks, so be it.
Open carry v concealed carry debate and you turn on each other.
Dafuq ever. Back to my hole now.
 
SPM said:
First, we're talking original intent, which is the Declaration of Independence. The Bill of Rights, of which the Second is a part, meant to codify restrictions on government power to protect the original intent of these United States.

Second, the Founders understood quite well and were keenly aware that ch
Click to expand...
I think you give them to much credit, I think they had a very narrow view of who, all men included aren't the number of signers of the declaration something like 1/3 didn't own slaves and two thirds did ,so I propose that the reason they didn't address the issues , was more economical for one, they weren't willing to throw them selves in to poverty for their ideals,and two they need to keep the colonists on their side, they were about to enter a war they couldn't win,without the colonists support, they also need to the document that declared them free from the British to try and lure Spain or France into the war. so they were willing to infringe on someones else's rights but for all the right reasons is what you're saying, I'd also like to bring up Jefferson who publicly supported freeing the slave, owned over 600, profited from them greatly,bought and sold them with regularity, and refused to free them at his death unlike Washington.. he played both sides against the middle, spoke of abolishing slavery I n public to keep support of the northern colonies who thought he would eventually, but refused to put this language in the document to keep support of the southern colonies. And as to my on personal thoughts of the document, alot of it's true intent has been perverted by the rulings of scotus along party lines, this is still the land of liberty and justice for all(All you can afford that is) after two day of arguing my position on education hasn't changed nor is it going to.
 
Last edited:
S4f said:
I think you give them to much credit, I think they had a very narrow view of who, all men included aren't the number of signers of the declaration something like 1/3 didn't own slaves and two thirds did ,so I propose that the reason they didn't address the issues , was more economical for one, they weren't willing to throw them selves in to poverty for their ideals,and two they need to keep the colonists on their side, they were about to enter a war they couldn't win,without the colonists support, they also need to the document that declared them free from the British to try and lure Spain or France into the war. so they were willing to infringe on someones else's rights but for all the right reasons is what you're saying, I'd also like to bring up Jefferson who publicly supported freeing the slave, owned over 600, profited from them greatly,bought and sold them with regularity, and refused to free them at his death unlike Washington.. he played both sides against the middle, spoke of abolishing slavery I n public to keep support of the northern colonies who thought he would eventually, but refused to put this language in the document to keep support of the southern colonies. And as to my on personal thoughts of the document, alot of it's true intent has been perverted by the rulings of scotus along party lines, this is still the land of liberty and justice for all(All you can afford that is) after two day of arguing my position on education hasn't changed nor is it going to.
Click to expand...

Damn, they were politicians just like we have today. I thought that they were perfect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S4f
I don't open carry in public, but often do at home. I also carry my support side gun concealed regardless if the primary gun is open or concealed. So if there was a losing struggle for the primary that situational awareness could not have prevented...

1gf3kk.jpg
 
Last edited:
Tailhunter said:
So since the founding fathers where not perfect, unlike some of you, we dismiss the constitution?
Click to expand...
SPM said:
That's the argument being made, because slavery, basically.
Click to expand...

I find it highly arrogant to judge the distant past based on present knowledge. Look at the use of leeches in medicine. They have fallen in and out of favor several times over the centuries, usually with the current "institution" mocking the ignorance and archaic thinking of the previous era.

How will people in 2120 judge us? How about 2220? What kind of excuses would we make for our decisions based on our limited knowledge and circumstances?

The fact that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were written during those times should prove just how amazing they were. 240 years have gone by since and the world has yet to replicate such an amazing display of liberty, much less a better one. No, let us not disparage these relics with our arrogance for the spoiled soil from which they grew. Let us embrace that these principles allowed us to get to where we are and allow us to continue to shine, if we listen clearly.
 
Dr 'Dre said:
Threads like this are why i never post in this fine forum.
Been a member since day one, check my join date and the almighty post count.
If we allow ourselves to be destroyed from within our ranks, so be it.
Open carry v concealed carry debate and you turn on each other.
Dafuq ever. Back to my hole now.
Click to expand...
Please don't let threads like this form your opinion of the forum.
 
Geezer said:
Please don't let threads like this form your opinion of the forum.
Click to expand...
I apologise for my participation in
this thread, arguments like this are better left to the closed section s of the forum, I generally come here for the witty banter and fellowship , to anyone, I've offend I ask your pardon
 
S4f said:
I apologise for my participation in
this thread, arguments like this are better left to the closed section s of the forum, I generally come here for the witty banter and fellowship , to anyone, I've offend I ask your pardon
Click to expand...
Threads like this are a part of the forum. It would be mighty boring if we all agreed on everything. We just want people to discuss and say their opinion without getting to personal attacks and insults. For the most part, we do a good job at it.
 
Last edited:
Geezer said:
Please don't let threads like this form your opinion of the forum.
Click to expand...
Negative Sir.
I'm old, grouchy, cynical and going through a divorce. It's impossible to "hurt my feelings" as i have none left.
Usually i bypass arguments just like an overpriced BST ad. Laugh and move on. I personally cc when in public so as not to stand out.
Now, to prove my witty sarcasm, I'll start WW-III with the following statements.

John Browning was an idiot with a poorly designed pistol.
Gaston Glock created perfection.
The .40 S/W round can stop a dragon at 1000 yards in one shot.
Rosie O'Donnel looks better naked than Shania Twain.
(threw up in my mouth as i typed the last one)

First one to disagree with me wins my ex-wife and a naked reloading session with @FatboyFlash

Paul out...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom