TexasCHLforum.com

Wasn't sure where to post this, but I just wanted to vent a little and possibly get some opinions.

I walked up to my math class this afternoon and found this kid, young guy, whatever, dressed in the kind of grunge look. camo shorts, sleeveless shirt, commando boots, lots of chains, you get the idea... but around his left leg was a belt/bracelet kind of rig of what looked like .243 rounds. Plus a larger belt of similar bullets around his waist. Now, dummy bullets or not, should this have been allowed on a college campus, especially while this debate goes on for CC on campus? I stood there for a few waiting for class to open and watched staff and others walk by and barely gave him a second glimpse. I really wanted to say something but didn't really want to start any drama over it. It just kind of ticks me off when this guy can dress like this while pro-campus carry people get searched just for wearing an empty holster on other campuses. Am I crazy for thinking this? Or even for not telling him my personal feelings about it? I just don't see why I have to leave my gun in the truck but he can openly wear what Looks to be real ammo. What do ya'll think?

Well... at least he's free to do it, and nobody gave him a second look. I guess that's better than being detained and searched for wearing something that looks like ammunition.

No big deal. He's free to dress as he wishes.

I need a fake .25 pistol mounted to a belt buckle see how that goes over.

The thing with me is, they didn't look "fake" as in plastic or whatever. The only reson I say they might have been dummy bullets is that I would hope they didn't have a charge in them, and that he bought them like that. But it was just bullets tied together with cord into a belt, nothing hard to do. Real brass, real lead. If they were live rounds, those belts must have cost him a lot to make, because there were a god number of rounds on him.

Do you think he shouldn't be allowed to wear ammo on campus?
Or that the legislation is hypocritical or inconsistent in that it allows live ammo but not a gun?
I'm not clear if your problem is with him, the laws, or both.

Maybe somebody should holler "BULLETS" at the top of their lungs? You know, the way people sometimes shout "GUN" when one is seen in public places. That'll get the 'bullet dude' the attention he is seeking.

Hoi Polloi wrote:Do you think he shouldn't be allowed to wear ammo on campus?
Or that the legislation is hypocritical or inconsistent in that it allows live ammo but not a gun?
I'm not clear if your problem is with him, the laws, or both.

I don't have a problem with him. I have a problem 1) with the legislation, yes, but 2) that no one sees this as any kind of concern. a gun without bullets is still viewed as a threat, but bullets without a viewed gun doesn't mean anything i guess. bullets can be dangerous without a gun, granted not a lethal. I guess i'm just not making myself clear or maybe i'm just over reacting.

bigmoney wrote:

Hoi Polloi wrote:Do you think he shouldn't be allowed to wear ammo on campus?
Or that the legislation is hypocritical or inconsistent in that it allows live ammo but not a gun?
I'm not clear if your problem is with him, the laws, or both.

I don't have a problem with him. I have a problem 1) with the legislation, yes, but 2) that no one sees this as any kind of concern. a gun without bullets is still viewed as a threat, but bullets without a viewed gun doesn't mean anything i guess. bullets can be dangerous without a gun, granted not a lethal. I guess i'm just not making myself clear or maybe i'm just over reacting.

One of the differences is that you can't tell whether a gun is loaded just by looking at it, so it is always a threat.

Let's make it a grammar school instead of a college. Would the principle allow a 5th grade boy to wear bullets—real or not—to school? Mind you, we're talking about schools where apparently bullet proof vests are no longer accepted for daily wear....

This is not a matter of fashion being appropriate for older kids but not for younger ones. The issue—in the minds of academia (where free speech is only encouraged if you speak the right speech)—is guns, not clothing. When a kid gets sent home from school because his pen has the Glock logo on it, fashion isn't the issue. Guns is the issue.

So in an environment which A) suppresses free speech unless it's the approved sort; and B) forbids anything to do with guns because, well... they're evil... ( ), I think that the other students and the faculty were remiss in not calling this wannabe out for wearing gun paraphernalia.

Well, obviously, he has a right to wear it. It's also obvious that someone who dresses like that has to be anti-gun. So it's just a sign of rebellion. Kids will be kids.

Now, what if he was dressed in nice jeans, a polo-type shirt, and had a chain with a dummy .38 special round on visible on it? Would he be called out?

Jasonw560 wrote:Well, obviously, he has a right to wear it. It's also obvious that someone who dresses like that has to be anti-gun. So it's just a sign of rebellion. Kids will be kids.

Now, what if he was dressed in nice jeans, a polo-type shirt, and had a chain with a dummy .38 special round on visible on it? Would he be called out?

Only if the chain also had a cross on it.

Jasonw560 wrote:Well, obviously, he has a right to wear it. It's also obvious that someone who dresses like that has to be anti-gun. So it's just a sign of rebellion. Kids will be kids.

Now, what if he was dressed in nice jeans, a polo-type shirt, and had a chain with a dummy .38 special round on visible on it? Would he be called out?

Wearing ammunition has been an acceptable fashion statement for many years.

WildBill wrote:

Jasonw560 wrote:Well, obviously, he has a right to wear it. It's also obvious that someone who dresses like that has to be anti-gun. So it's just a sign of rebellion. Kids will be kids.

Now, what if he was dressed in nice jeans, a polo-type shirt, and had a chain with a dummy .38 special round on visible on it? Would he be called out?

Wearing ammunition has been an acceptable fashion statement for many years.

Pawpaw wrote:

Jasonw560 wrote:Well, obviously, he has a right to wear it. It's also obvious that someone who dresses like that has to be anti-gun. So it's just a sign of rebellion. Kids will be kids.

Now, what if he was dressed in nice jeans, a polo-type shirt, and had a chain with a dummy .38 special round on visible on it? Would he be called out?

Only if the chain also had a cross on it.

Or if the round had a cross engraved into it, or superimposed somehow.