TexasCHLforum.com

cyphertext wrote:

LSUTiger wrote:
Ancedotal evidence isn't a wise strategy and "sheepdog" is not my term.

I carry to protect me and mine and if In the process someone else benefits then it's their lucky day.

A problem some people have is assuming they know what type of person someone is and questioning their motives because of it instead of evaluating the logic behind what they say

im sure you think I'm the sheepdog type out to play hero to the world but thats the furthest from the truth.

i just believe you feel it necessary to carry a handgun you probably should also carry a rifle too as a practicle matter

Umm, anecdotal evidence is exactly what you give in your "remember San Bernadino" line... And you used the word "sheeple", "wolf" and "sheepdog" are the other terms that go with that. I also notice that you are trying to dodge my question of why you shouldn't be plugged on site when walking into a Christmas party carrying a rifle and wearing a vest with 210 round load out.

So, again I will ask, do you carry a rifle everywhere you go? You carry that rifle with you when you go out to eat with your wife? Maybe to the movies?

I doubt it, as it is just too inconvenient and is not an accepted social norm.

Unfortunately incidents like San Bernardino, (active shooters with long guns taking out lots of people), have happened enough times that they are no longer anecdotal, it's becoming the norm and is the standard playbook for terrorists and nut jobs.

An unfortunately open carrying a long gun is not the accepted social norm. I'm simply recognizing the problem and trying to apply the appropriate preparedness/response. But it is the appropriate preparedness/response to those kinds of threats. And those threats are real.

Why shouldn't you get plugged on sight when walking into anywhere OCing a handgun? Why shouldn't you get plugged on sight the second you accidentally expose your CC handgun? So you are saying that it's ok to just go an shoot anyone who is exercising their 2A rights and following the law? Their needs to be a little more that just possessing firearms to justify shooting on sight when carrying . Carrying a long gun whether OC or CC is lawful in TX and not LTC required.

Yes, I do carry a rifle caliber pistol in my vehicle. But like all guns, it won't do me much good if I don't have it on me when I need it. If I can make it back to my vehicle chances are I am going to just get the heck out.

And sheeple is a good word to describe the people, whether they know it or not, that are just going around waiting to be slaughtered like sheep with out any sort of armed self defense plan. That doesn't make me a sheepdog. The only sheep I worry about are my own, I'll help others if I can but it's a me first attitude not a hero complex.

I have occasionally OCed a long guns although it was briefly, getting in and out of vehicles, returning guns/showing guns to friends in the parking lot at lunch, after sighting in rifles/mounting scopes and such things. No one has ever complained.

The reason I don't regularly OC a long gun is not because it's inconvenient, I'd do it in a heart beat of it was more acceptable. Now that OC of handguns for LTC is law, they can go take a flying leap, I'll OC hand guns where allowed.

In any case, OC handguns or long guns, a journey of a 1000 miles begins with the first step. Now that OC of handguns is legal, more people will become desensitized to it. Hopefully in time that will transfer over to long guns. I'm not using OCT in you face sort of tactics, but I'm trying to use the one step at a time approach. But there comes a time when the next step forward is to actually exercise your rights instead of being afraid to use them. And if merely exercising your rights is considered "in your face" tactics then I'll just have to say suck it up buttercup.

So I'll OC handguns where I can and I still have no problems with people OCing long guns.

As for carrying long guns when eating dinner or movies, whether OC or CC is lawful in TX and not LTC required. If take down long guns were more practical to deploy, I certainly would.

I see a Keltec Sub2000 or SU-16 in my future or perhaps I'll have to SBR my AR pistol, it sure would help to get around those annoying 30.06 signs.

Next time I go to dinner I will bring my AR pistol in my tennis racket case. I will let you know how it goes.

cyphertext wrote:

LSUTiger wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

LSUTiger wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

LSUTiger wrote:
And before the anti-OCT/OC crowd chimes in I must say that while OCT's cause is righteous I disagree with much of their tactics. But rights not exercised are rights lost.

I think you will find that most agree with you here about the cause vs. tactics. However, I don't believe that the 2A gives you the right to carry your AR 15 into the local Chipotle... As you stated, that right is there to protect against tyranny, and I haven't witnessed an tyrannical oppression at my local Starbuck's. Look at the Battle of Athens... Those men took up their arms when it was necessary to insure their county election was without corruption. Once order had been restored, the arms were put away... not paraded down at the local cafe. Time and place.

When I'm sitting at the cafe and some terrorist or other crazy wants to have his/her 15 minutes of infamy at decides to shoot the place up I 'd rather have a rifle handy than just a puny handgun.

How's the saying go, "a pistol is just so you can fight your way back to the rifle you should have never left behind "

Rifles meant for defense against tyranny and oppression can also be used against other everyday threats and are what I'd rather have in a defensive situation. That's a true tactical advantage.

Your argument is silly.

So you carry a rifle everywhere you go? I don't. That isn't practical. We are not at a point in this country where I live in fear and feel the need to carry an AR 15 and a 210 round load out everywhere I go. That day hopefully will never come. Today, I am quite comfortable with my Sig P290 and 7 round capacity. And I don't believe that the 2A trumps property rights.

I never said that 2A rights trump property rights just pointing out the validity of carrying a long gun for self defense

Carrying an AR15 with a 210 rd loadout is legal whether it's cc or oc. the only thing that makes it impractical is the response of the sheeple who pee their pants when they see it and the police who are not worthy of the badge if they can't fully support and respect people's 2A right.

What makes you comfortable leaves me feeling uncomfortably under prepared.

Remember San Bernadino?

While it is legal, it is very impractical due to more than "response of the sheeple"... but let's look at that response first... Let's think about San Bernadino. You walk into the room wearing your vest with 210 rounds and your rifle slung across your chest at the low ready from a single point sling... I have no way of knowing what your intentions are. To use your terms, a "sheepdog" would plug you right there when you walked in, as you are an unknown threat to the flock.

Besides making others uncomfortable, a rifle and ammo is heavy and cumbersome. With my handgun, it is still on my hip when I sit down at a table at a restaurant... where is your rifle? You have to unsling it, and put it somewhere which equates to more handling of the rifle... or more opportunity for negligent discharge.

I can see the logic of carrying a rifle and ammo in the trunk of your car, if you feel so inclined... but if I am with my family, and we make it out of the danger zone to our car, then we are leaving. I don't carry with the intention of being the hero.

And if we are going to throw out incidents that have very low odds of you being involved in them as San Bernadino as support, then remember Garland? One officer with a pistol took down two terrorists armed with AKs.

Heck, another Texas lawman took down an active shooter from 100 yards away with his pistol, while holding horses in the other hand.

Ancedotal evidence isn't a wise strategy and "sheepdog" is not my term.

I carry to protect me and mine and if In the process someone else benefits then it's their lucky day.

A problem some people have is assuming they know what type of person someone is and questioning their motives because of it instead of evaluating the logic behind what they say

im sure you think I'm the sheepdog type out to play hero to the world but thats the furthest from the truth.

i just believe you feel it necessary to carry a handgun you probably should also carry a rifle too as a practicle matter

cyphertext wrote:

LSUTiger wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

LSUTiger wrote:
And before the anti-OCT/OC crowd chimes in I must say that while OCT's cause is righteous I disagree with much of their tactics. But rights not exercised are rights lost.

I think you will find that most agree with you here about the cause vs. tactics. However, I don't believe that the 2A gives you the right to carry your AR 15 into the local Chipotle... As you stated, that right is there to protect against tyranny, and I haven't witnessed an tyrannical oppression at my local Starbuck's. Look at the Battle of Athens... Those men took up their arms when it was necessary to insure their county election was without corruption. Once order had been restored, the arms were put away... not paraded down at the local cafe. Time and place.

When I'm sitting at the cafe and some terrorist or other crazy wants to have his/her 15 minutes of infamy at decides to shoot the place up I 'd rather have a rifle handy than just a puny handgun.

How's the saying go, "a pistol is just so you can fight your way back to the rifle you should have never left behind "

Rifles meant for defense against tyranny and oppression can also be used against other everyday threats and are what I'd rather have in a defensive situation. That's a true tactical advantage.

Your argument is silly.

So you carry a rifle everywhere you go? I don't. That isn't practical. We are not at a point in this country where I live in fear and feel the need to carry an AR 15 and a 210 round load out everywhere I go. That day hopefully will never come. Today, I am quite comfortable with my Sig P290 and 7 round capacity. And I don't believe that the 2A trumps property rights.

I never said that 2A rights trump property rights just pointing out the validity of carrying a long gun for self defense

Carrying an AR15 with a 210 rd loadout is legal whether it's cc or oc. the only thing that makes it impractical is the response of the sheeple who pee their pants when they see it and the police who are not worthy of the badge if they can't fully support and respect people's 2A right.

What makes you comfortable leaves me feeling uncomfortably under prepared.

Remember San Bernadino?

cyphertext wrote:

LSUTiger wrote:
And before the anti-OCT/OC crowd chimes in I must say that while OCT's cause is righteous I disagree with much of their tactics. But rights not exercised are rights lost.

I think you will find that most agree with you here about the cause vs. tactics. However, I don't believe that the 2A gives you the right to carry your AR 15 into the local Chipotle... As you stated, that right is there to protect against tyranny, and I haven't witnessed an tyrannical oppression at my local Starbuck's. Look at the Battle of Athens... Those men took up their arms when it was necessary to insure their county election was without corruption. Once order had been restored, the arms were put away... not paraded down at the local cafe. Time and place.

When I'm sitting at the cafe and some terrorist or other crazy wants to have his/her 15 minutes of infamy at decides to shoot the place up I 'd rather have a rifle handy than just a puny handgun.

How's the saying go, "a pistol is just so you can fight your way back to the rifle you should have never left behind "

Rifles meant for defense against tyranny and oppression can also be used against other everyday threats and are what I'd rather have in a defensive situation. That's a true tactical advantage.

A rifle, even a black scary one is a legitimate form of self defense.

Some want to feel safe and some want to be safe, there is a difference.

Your argument is silly.

chuckybrown wrote:So, if one agrees with CC, but not OC....is it possible to be a partial 2A supporter?

In other words....can someone support 2A rights....but only to a certain extent...i.e. not exercising 2A rights that might make others "uncomfortable"?

I'm curious, because I think you're either all in, or you're not.

No flames wanted, just honest discourse.

Happy 2016!

To answer the OP's question is an unequivocal yes! It's possible to be an almost 2A supporter.

Imagine for a second if you said I'll only allow light skinned black Americans in my store but not dark skinned black Americans because they are too scary.

Well that's the logic some apply to gun ownership and the 2A.

What about FUDDS? It's ok to have my Grand Pappy's old bolt action 30.06 but you don't need those scary black rifles for hunting.

Well guess what, the 2A wasn't about hunting, it was about giving the citizenry a means to fight tyranny and oppression from our own government. the other reason was to defend your life. the whole defense of life and liberty concept.

so when you start to pick and choose what you part to support you are an almost 2A supporter.

And whatever mode of carry you choose CC or OC you should support both.

In my view the 2A guarantees the right of the citizenry constitutional carry of the same firearms technology available to our government including all the necessary magazines, ammo and accessories to make it possible to defend against tyranny without restrictions. That's part of what freedom is. Until this becomes the way it is again we must continue to fight to regain rights taken away over time.

To me it's an all or nothing deal.

There's too many willing to compromise as long as it doesn't affect them. The problem with that is it just doesn't work that way. Any compromise on the 2A affects us all by compromising our freedom.

And before the anti-OCT/OC crowd chimes in I must say that while OCT's cause is righteous I disagree with much of their tactics. But rights not exercised are rights lost.

I am not an in your face type but I'm not AFRAID to stand up for my rights or what is right. If you are afraid to do that I'd call it cowardice.

I feel very uncomfortable that the anti-gunners want strip my rights away because they choose not to exercise theirs. So really I'm not really all that sympathetic to what makes them uncomfortable.

There are lots of things that make me uncomfortable but am forced to accept by law.

It's time for gun owners to come out if the closet and be accepted.