Open carry "contact" by hot headed LEO.

[03Lightningrocks]

And the very fact that the majority of people on this pro-gun board are either afraid to open carry a long gun in a public place, or critical of those who do, further demonstrates that there is no such right to carry.

I know your not accurate in your statement as it apples to me, nor do I believe your accurate in your statements as it apples to most here

If you change your statement to the majority of people on this pro-gun board are against the in your face aggressive open carry tactics employed by a minority of gun owners here in Texas.. I would agree.. If you further stated the majority of people on this pro-gun board are of the understanding, in your face, aggressive open carry antics are counter productive to any possible positive outcome.. I would agree.

But I think you know that already.. and others can chime in for them selves should they choose to.

EXACTLY! But there are fanatics with no real arguments or reasoning ability that will always resort to accusing the rest of us of being anti gun. It is another way of admitting they have no good argument. The most ridiculous thing is when posters twist a post out of shape.

[03Lightningrocks]

I never said it but I feel the officers behaved in a very professional manner and infringed on no rights. The only issue I have with the head shot is a higher probability of missing. I live in Plano and bet the cops here would have you face down on the ground and in cuffs under the exact same situation.

It looks to me like the officer stopped a citizen without RAS or PC (OC-guy was not doing anything illegal. Possession of a legal object is NOT sufficient for RAS or PC), threatened to shoot him in the head. The officer acknowledged that he knew the guy was just making a political point (which confirms that the officer didn't have RAS or PC to begin with). The OC guys are detained and threatened with being shot in the head.

What part of that is "professional" and "not infringing"?
How is this ok? Just because the officer was calm and in control about it?

Here's a good blog post from a LEO that says it better than me..
http://chiefweems.wordpress.com/2013/11 ... ifference/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is OK if it saves your children from being gunned down by a lunatic walking down the street of a modern city toting a shotgun as if he thinks it is Dodge city Kansas.

Hearing "There will be blood in the streets" from CHL-toters leaves me speechless. And a little saddened.

Just to confirm, you agree there was no RAS or PC, but are ok with LEO's actions regardless?

Yes!!! The probable cause is a clown toting a gun down the street of a modern city looking for trouble. How does your visual of a world with us all walking around toting our choice of rifle apply when it comes to the Bloods or the Crips? maybe MS13? there are members of both those gangs with no criminal record who have the same right.

[VMI77]

And the very fact that the majority of people on this pro-gun board are either afraid to open carry a long gun in a public place, or critical of those who do, further demonstrates that there is no such right to carry.

I know your not accurate in your statement as it apples to me, nor do I believe your accurate in your statements as it apples to most here

If you change your statement to the majority of people on this pro-gun board are against the in your face aggressive open carry tactics employed by a minority of gun owners here in Texas.. I would agree.. If you further stated the majority of people on this pro-gun board are of the understanding, in your face, aggressive open carry antics are counter productive to any possible positive outcome.. I would agree.

But I think you know that already.. and others can chime in for them selves should they choose to.

In the first place, I didn't say the majority on this board are against open carry....I said that people afraid to open carry plus those critical of it are a majority.

Really, you're not afraid to walk into Walmart or HEB with an AR15 slung over your back? Say, on the way to the range, don't want to leave your gun in your vehicle? OK, well, good for you then. I'm afraid to do it. I suspect very few people on this board would try it. As far as the difference between aggressive in-your-face tactics and "regular" open carry...hard to say because in every case I've seen discussed here the person open carrying was accused of being "in-your-face." That in and of itself should tell you something. I haven't seen anyone open carrying a rifle or shotgun in public for years now, and I live in small town Texas, not one of the cities.

Let me clarify my point. It is perhaps more accurate to say that long gun open carry is so unusual and so contentious that the majority of people on this pro-gun board don't do it.

[03Lightningrocks]

And the very fact that the majority of people on this pro-gun board are either afraid to open carry a long gun in a public place, or critical of those who do, further demonstrates that there is no such right to carry.

I know your not accurate in your statement as it apples to me, nor do I believe your accurate in your statements as it apples to most here

If you change your statement to the majority of people on this pro-gun board are against the in your face aggressive open carry tactics employed by a minority of gun owners here in Texas.. I would agree.. If you further stated the majority of people on this pro-gun board are of the understanding, in your face, aggressive open carry antics are counter productive to any possible positive outcome.. I would agree.

But I think you know that already.. and others can chime in for them selves should they choose to.

In the first place, I didn't say the majority on this board are against open carry....I said that people afraid to open carry plus those critical of it are a majority.

Really, you're not afraid to walk into Walmart or HEB with an AR15 slung over your back? Say, on the way to the range, don't want to leave your gun in your vehicle? OK, well, good for you then. I'm afraid to do it. I suspect very few people on this board would try it. As far as the difference between aggressive in-your-face tactics and "regular" open carry...hard to say because in every case I've seen discussed here the person open carrying was accused of being "in-your-face." That in and of itself should tell you something. I haven't seen anyone open carrying a rifle or shotgun in public for years now, and I live in small town Texas, not one of the cities.

Let me clarify my point. It is perhaps more accurate to say that long gun open carry is so unusual and so contentious that the majority of people on this pro-gun board don't do it.

I for one am not afraid to do it. I am not afraid to wear jorts into walmart either. But doing either would make me look like a darned fool so I don't do it because I prefer not to look ridiculous and attract unwanted attention.

[VMI77]

And the very fact that the majority of people on this pro-gun board are either afraid to open carry a long gun in a public place, or critical of those who do, further demonstrates that there is no such right to carry.

I know your not accurate in your statement as it apples to me, nor do I believe your accurate in your statements as it apples to most here

If you change your statement to the majority of people on this pro-gun board are against the in your face aggressive open carry tactics employed by a minority of gun owners here in Texas.. I would agree.. If you further stated the majority of people on this pro-gun board are of the understanding, in your face, aggressive open carry antics are counter productive to any possible positive outcome.. I would agree.

But I think you know that already.. and others can chime in for them selves should they choose to.

EXACTLY! But the fanatics with no real arguments or reasoning ability will always resort to accusing the rest of us of being anti gun. It is another way of them admitting they have no good argument. The most ridiculous thing is when they twist a post out of shape to make it sound like something their paranoia will allow them to digest.

You're one funny dude. You say this and call other people "fanatics":

Funny. The in your face tactics of open carry folks got themselves banned from Starbucks. Then we have these two morons, trying real hard to get a law passed banning the open carry of a long guns.

Just for the heck of it I will tell you all right now, a guy comes walking up to a place I am at with a open gun or shot gun. I am going to blow that retard right out of his shoes if he so much as pretends he is about to hold the gun in a manner required to shoot it.

So, whoever doesn't see things your way is a moron or a retard, and you're gonna gun them down on pretense, but they're "fanatics" and you're just a thoughtful guy?

Then, you quote me as "twisting" words to suit my argument, which you apparently think is support for open carry (hint.....it isn't), while twisting words to claim I said anti-open carry people are "anti-gun." Talk about twisting words......

But hey, I guess I just can't see your brilliance because I'm devoid of reasoning ability. You funny man.....you very funny man.

[VMI77]

And the very fact that the majority of people on this pro-gun board are either afraid to open carry a long gun in a public place, or critical of those who do, further demonstrates that there is no such right to carry.

I know your not accurate in your statement as it apples to me, nor do I believe your accurate in your statements as it apples to most here

If you change your statement to the majority of people on this pro-gun board are against the in your face aggressive open carry tactics employed by a minority of gun owners here in Texas.. I would agree.. If you further stated the majority of people on this pro-gun board are of the understanding, in your face, aggressive open carry antics are counter productive to any possible positive outcome.. I would agree.

But I think you know that already.. and others can chime in for them selves should they choose to.

In the first place, I didn't say the majority on this board are against open carry....I said that people afraid to open carry plus those critical of it are a majority.

Really, you're not afraid to walk into Walmart or HEB with an AR15 slung over your back? Say, on the way to the range, don't want to leave your gun in your vehicle? OK, well, good for you then. I'm afraid to do it. I suspect very few people on this board would try it. As far as the difference between aggressive in-your-face tactics and "regular" open carry...hard to say because in every case I've seen discussed here the person open carrying was accused of being "in-your-face." That in and of itself should tell you something. I haven't seen anyone open carrying a rifle or shotgun in public for years now, and I live in small town Texas, not one of the cities.

Let me clarify my point. It is perhaps more accurate to say that long gun open carry is so unusual and so contentious that the majority of people on this pro-gun board don't do it.

I for one am not afraid to do it. I am not afraid to wear jorts into walmart either. But doing either would make me look like a darned fool so I don't do it because I prefer not to look ridiculous and attract unwanted attention.

Please clarify --if you're not afraid to look like a fool why wouldn't you do it? Methinks you're playing semantic games.

[mojo84]

I liken it to a guy running around going to the bank, grocery store, hanging around across from an elementary school and other places where it is expected people wear clothes without anything on except those skimpy little running shorts. It isn't a problem when you see the guy running but in the other places, it doesn't fit and someone may feel the need to have the police make contact. It isn't illegal but it also isn't practical in today's society. I suspect if you pushed it, someone will end up calling the police and they would make contact with the person. Is that an infringement on one's rights?

[sawdust]

"Legalistics" aside:

If I see someone with a rifle at a range, I will keep my eye on him
If I see someone with a rifle in a hunting environment, I will keep my eye on him
If I see someone walking down the street & carrying a rifle, I will be on alert
If I see someone with a rifle coming into a Luby's cafeteria, I will be on high alert
If I see someone with a rifle in a school setting, I will be on high, high, high alert and ready to move, move, move

[E.Marquez]

Just to confirm, you agree there was no RAS or PC, but are ok with LEO's actions regardless?

Do you believe a LEO most KNOW a crime had been committed before a contact is made? a Detention for the purpose of investigation conducted?

Do you believe the officer seeing a shot gun, where no obvious, common, lawful purpose is plainly visible might be within reasonable limits to contact the citizen and conduct a quick inquiry?

Seems this happens and is acceptable for many reasons... Does an officer KNOW the driver in front of him is intoxicated? Or does he think it's just possible?
Does an officer KNOW the guy carrying the TV down the street is a thief? Or is it just a possibility?

And Does the officer KNOW the ,man with a shot gun where no common and obvious need for said gun is plainly present.. Does he KNOW that man is not a person prohibited fro possessing a gun? Does that officer KNOW with out contact that while carrying that long gun may be perfectly legal, it may not as well.. and the only way to find out is to make contact, or wait for an overt illegal use of the gun.

[VMI77]

Do you believe the officer seeing a shot gun, where no obvious, common, lawful purpose is plainly visible might be within reasonable limits to contact the citizen and conduct a quick inquiry?

You just keep making my point. A "right" is not contingent on having an obvious, common, lawful purpose, whether those words are considered separately, or together. The exercise of a "right" can't be "unlawful." Furthermore, there is no requirement that the exercise of a "right" have an obvious reason or purpose. As I said, there is no "right" to open carry a long gun in this State, it's a privilege practiced with permission from representatives of the government.

BTW, while it may not be obvious to you why someone is walking down a city street with a rifle slung over their shoulder, and you may not know what his purpose is, I can think of various legitimate reasons. He's going to show his new gun to a friend who is sick and can't leave his apartment. His neighbor is a gun smith and he's bringing the gun over for him to work on it. His neighbor told him to drop by with his gun and new scope and he'll bore sight it for him. He previously borrowed the gun to use at the range, and since the guy lives two doors down and he doesn't have a case, he just decided to walk it over to him. What you're saying above essentially amounts to saying that the mere possession of a long gun in public is at least suspicious, and may amount to PC. Long-gun open carry is not a "right" under those conditions.

[03Lightningrocks]

Funny, after stating that the less intelligent will resort to twisting around a post, my point is immediately proven by someone posting that I claimed a person is a moron for not agreeing with me. I said nothing like that. I referred to those two clowns as morons. They asked for trouble, and they received it. Thanks for helping to prove my point.

[03Lightningrocks]

"Legalistics" aside:

If I see someone with a rifle at a range, I will keep my eye on him
If I see someone with a rifle in a hunting environment, I will keep my eye on him
If I see someone walking down the street & carrying a rifle, I will be on alert
If I see someone with a rifle coming into a Luby's cafeteria, I will be on high alert
If I see someone with a rifle in a school setting, I will be on high, high, high alert and ready to move, move, move

Exactly!!!

[VMI77]

Funny, after stating that the less intelligent will resort to twisting around a post, my point is immediately proven by someone posting that I claimed a person is a moron for not agreeing with me. I said nothing like that. I referred to those two clowns as morons. They asked for trouble, and they received it. Thanks for helping to prove my point.

You quoted another poster quoting me and said:

EXACTLY! But there are fanatics with no real arguments or reasoning ability that will always resort to accusing the rest of us of being anti gun.

You obviously were not addressing him. So, nice try, but fail.

[03Lightningrocks]

Funny, after stating that the less intelligent will resort to twisting around a post, my point is immediately proven by someone posting that I claimed a person is a moron for not agreeing with me. I said nothing like that. I referred to those two clowns as morons. They asked for trouble, and they received it. Thanks for helping to prove my point.

You quoted another poster quoting me and said:

EXACTLY! But there are fanatics with no real arguments or reasoning ability that will always resort to accusing the rest of us of being anti gun.

You obviously were not addressing him. So, nice try, but fail.

Nice try?? You are obviously reading way more into a post than was intended. I don't think you and I have anything more to post to each other on this topic that will contribute. Have a good day.

[VMI77]

Funny, after stating that the less intelligent will resort to twisting around a post, my point is immediately proven by someone posting that I claimed a person is a moron for not agreeing with me. I said nothing like that. I referred to those two clowns as morons. They asked for trouble, and they received it. Thanks for helping to prove my point.

You quoted another poster quoting me and said:

EXACTLY! But there are fanatics with no real arguments or reasoning ability that will always resort to accusing the rest of us of being anti gun.

You obviously were not addressing him. So, nice try, but fail.

Nice try?? You are obviously reading way more into a post than was intended. I don't think you and I have anything more to post to each other on this topic that will contribute. Have a good day.

Well, one more thing: