Jump to content
Redlines

SAF going anti gun

Recommended Posts

I didn't think you were for laws outlawing carrying at rallies[mention=5135]bhunted[/mention], but is your personal feeling that one shouldn't carry to a rally? Just asking a question.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

You guys cannot understand my point.

Lets try again. It is your right to carry. No denying it. I won't retype the line that states blah blah because you should. Read it over...

 

Strategy is different than just carrying down main street. I'm done. Wear a NJGF t-shirt at the next rally so I can recognize you on my huuuuuuge flat screen.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You guys cannot understand my point.Lets try again. It is your right to carry. No denying it. I won't retype the line that states blah blah because you should. Read it over... Strategy is different than just carrying down main street. I'm done. Wear a NJGF t-shirt at the next rally so I can recognize you on my huuuuuuge flat screen. 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

Personally I am not one for rallies. I don't see where they really accomplish anything.  I also don't understand the answer. The question wasn't whether it is a right.   

I was just looking for your or anyone elses opinion.

 

Simple yes or no should one carry concealed if they go to a Save Stonewall Jackson Statue Rally? Is there a way to make it a poll? I am really just curious as to the opinions here.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, capt14k said:

Personally I am not one for rallies. I don't see where they really accomplish anything.  I also don't understand the answer. The question wasn't whether it is a right.   

I was just looking for your or anyone elses opinion.

 

Simple yes or no should one carry concealed if they go to a Save Stonewall Jackson Statue Rally? Is there a way to make it a poll? I am really just curious as to the opinions here.

 

 

If you carry regularly and happen to decide to go to a rally that is different from arming up to attend the rally. One is just a thing you do. The other is just being provocative. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you carry regularly and happen to decide to go to a rally that is different from arming up to attend the rally. One is just a thing you do. The other is just being provocative. 

  I can agree with that as an individual.

 

Honestly though from watching the Militia groups they were very well behaved and an asset in Charlottesville. Not sure if that would always be the case, but it was there. The Militia Members in Charlottesville were made up of members of Lightfoot Militia and Three Percenters from multiple states.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

If you carry regularly and happen to decide to go to a rally that is different from arming up to attend the rally. One is just a thing you do. The other is just being provocative. 

Play stupid games win stupid prizes 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are we seriously debating this? We teach our kids this before kindergarten:
"Just because you can, doesn't mean you should."
On a different note - if you are going to any kind of rally/protest/march/etc... and you see KKK or swastikas, that's a clue to about face and go home. All your presence does is add credence to those awful people.
Standing shoulder to shoulder with a brown shirt or a white sheet will never ever help our cause.
Perfectly said [emoji106] [emoji106]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Indianajonze said:

to me, open carry is open carry. whether you're out protesting/counter protesting or shopping for milk, it's all the same. protected under 2A. and i do agree with the comment above that i think a lot of violence from the antifa-types was prevented because some of the protesters were well armed. it's one thing to set fires to cars and smash windows when a bunch of bookworm berkeley professors are watching. quite another to incite violence when half the crowd is armed. 

anyway, exactly none of this matters to me as i live in new jersey and have to beg for permission to buy a handgun so i can lock it in a safe and never let it see the light of day. actually, strike everything i said above. i'm 100% a u.s. citizen, and if i can't open carry, then nobody should be able to open carry. you should not have any more rights than i do because you live in virginia and i live in nj

Where you can open carry is a 10A issue.  NJ and a lot of other states say no.  VA and a lot of other states say yes. There are other amendments to the Constitution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hang on...I need to go get some more tin foil before I  read any further. .....   Pretty sure? [emoji4]  

When your 100% sure - then let's talk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 I am 100% positive those pics of all the people with torches is from Charlottesville Friday Night. Pretty sure was being used sarcastically, since the MSM said they are from Charlottesville Torch Ceremony, and they have lied about so many other pics. 

When you can present your evidence of Real White Supremacists being present at the Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville I am ready to listen. Please See my previous post where the MSM is using photos from other events and saying it was the same rally before posting them as evidence.

 

I love the tin foil hat commenting crowd. The same people don't even know what Operation Northwoods or Operation Gladio were, and they are more than happy to live like a mushroom, kept in the dark and fed crap.

 

These are the pics you get from the MSM when you search White Supremacists at Unite the Right Rally. Then WAPO says these are White Supremacists in their captions. Why are they White Supremacists and not just Proud Southerners?? Another Torch Lighting pic too. Please pic out the Neo Nazi?

 

3be740401e1f5696ff5595c13013ecd9.jpg

 

30e655003e8b13137bc9d70084385c4f.jpg

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree if you don't normally carry you should not carry just to incite fear or violence.

The Militia guys I used to think were completely crazy and many probably are. However the ones in Charlottesville prevented more violence. If the police are going to listen to their Liberal Masters in these cities and stand down there maybe a place for these groups being armed and in the open.

The reason I bring up the lies of the MSM about it being a White Supremacist Rally is that many here have fallen for the lies.

Here is a raw video of the torch march. It is pretty clear they are saying "You Will Not Replace Us".



Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like I've been saying all along.  It's all about the "imagery" and how the anti 2A forces (especially the MSM) can twist and misinterpret that imagery for their own agenda. The image of us OC'ing at any rally, even a strict pro 2A support rally is a gold mind to the anti's that want to show us in a bad light. All those "idiots with their cammo and orange and big black scary assault weapons..."  :facepalm:  Now, multiply that with the images of known hate groups (KKK, Nazi's etc.) and there's nothing but trouble.

Yes, I do support OC for those that wish to do it. I personally would not unless I'm somewhere where it is SOP (like an outdoor range where everyone does it). And, personally, I like that element of surprise.  But, as High Exposure says, "Just because you have the right to do it doesn't mean you should." We must face a sobering truth...We pro2A folks are a small group compared with the rest of the country. It's not that all the others are "anti."   It's that most don't really think about it.  But they do listen to the MSM, and they tend to believe what they're told. And.... they vote!  Yes, I'm talking about the "sheeples."   And so we have to be very careful about how we pro-2A folks present ourselves to the rest of society. This will have to be a gradual, "evolutionary" process.  People have to get used to the concept of seeing people other than LEOs OC'ing. Like I've said before, if the "2A fairy" were to wave her wand and make NJ "Constitutional Carry" tomorrow (both OC & CC), doing so would reek havoc... as most of the public would be SWATing the OC'ers like crazy.  It needs to be a bit more gradual than that.  Not so "gradual/evolutionary" that it never seems to happen, but not that it happens "all at once" either.

For the MSM, It's all about the imagery.  It needs to be for us as well.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think those in free states don't see open carry being a big deal, wherever it is, because their rights are secure like our forefathers intended.

 

Until the Supreme Court Rules on what keep and bear arms and will not be infringed means nothing will change in Red or Blue States. I was positive about National Reciprocity Bill but at this point it is a pipe dream. They didn't have the votes to stop it, but the MSM made the Sheeple look at the shiny object first Fake Russian Story now Fake White Supremacists Story. While the sheeple are staring at the shiny object nothing is getting done. I have to give it to the Left they are good at Propaganda.

 

As long as the brain dead continue to listen to their Union Leaders in NJ and vote Democrat or refuse to vote Republican because the nominee is "too religious" or Pro-Life it doesn't matter if people open carry or don't carry at all. Democrats will not suddenly take a Pro-2A stance. Blue States will remain Blue and will continue to lose 2A Rights until the Supreme Court finally steps in. If you care about 2A stop voting Democrat. Take a stand and tell your union rep you will not support Murphy.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its pretty clear that many us have *strong* opinion of OC, especially when MSM successfully ties it to "neo-nazi", "alt-right" and any other new "feel guilty" word they happen to coin next day.  Its interesting to see some of these comments from same people who would declare "Molon labe"....

Unless I missed, SAF simply said they "highly discourage" the practice of OC to make political point. Thats far cry from them supporting any legislation banning firearms at protests. Lets not put cart before the horse. 

I am going to get flamed for this, but while its a great practical advice everyone should think about, I have strong reservations against "just because you can doesnt mean you should" thought process. When it came to firearm carry, NJ legislature, in their infinite wisdom through so too. Just because 2A says one can "bear arms" doesn't mean you (the citizen) should. What does a firearm at work (plugin your favorite activity) serve a purpose other than escalate a situation ? The natural next step was "who decides when its appropriate" ? Hence the laws involving your local CLEO through a Judge to decide if you (the citizen) got "Justifiable Need". 

We can debate this until cows come home or run out of expensive box of 22s. But thats where the "permits" and "justifiable need" came from. 

Couple of my esteemed colleagues extended this further and proposed that we should "ban" all neo-nazi protests, dont let them talk, burn their books (ring a bell?) ....their argument was "just because they can talk doesnt mean we should let them".  Oh wait, there is more. Lets through "alt-right" into that bucket too. And since good portion of republicans are "alt-right", lets throw them under the same bus. Really ?

 

Bottomline, large organizations like SAF regularly walk the tight rope. Whats to be seen is IF they walk into the trap and support further unnecessary legislation that serves no purpose than further infringement on individual rights. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa there. The ability to make a mature and pragmatic decision on whether or not to carry a firearm to a particular event/destination/etc... i.e.: a Just because you can doesn't mean you should type decision - is a FAR cry from "justifiable need" laws. 

One is a personal choice made by you after identifying aggravating and mitigating factors and coming to a logical decision. You make these decision every day all day - example: You are having a party at your house and all your friends are coming over. You are going to be drinking a lot. Do you wear a gun on your hip - either OC or CCW? Why or why not? You can, but should you?

The other is a decision made for you by others.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the thought process of someone (NJ Legislature & Anti-Firearms) who thinks of themselves as savior is EXACTLY same as "just because you can doesnt mean you should".  Except, its a step further, because they "know" people are idiots and cannot use common sense. And thats where this whole thing is going. Legislation. 

Suggesting to someone and then leaving it up to them is different from piling on what is an obvious attempt to bring on legislation barring firearms. Lets hope this doesnt turn into "others making decision for me/us". 

For now, SAF made a simple comment "discouraging the practice" and they are right in doing so. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is a language issue going on....

It should be a self diagnostic thing. Ask yourself "Just because I can doesn't mean I should".

When explaining this concept to others it's commonly said - "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should"

It is not an imposed mindset, it is introspection.

Edited by High Exposure
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, voyager9 said:

If you carry regularly and happen to decide to go to a rally that is different from arming up to attend the rally. One is just a thing you do. The other is just being provocative. 

if you conceal carry at a rally, how are you provoking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, 1LtCAP said:

if you conceal carry at a rally, how are you provoking?

You are going off base. They are brandishing.... Chest pounding, etc... That is provoking.....that is not concealed.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, GRIZ said:

Where you can open carry is a 10A issue.  NJ and a lot of other states say no.  VA and a lot of other states say yes. There are other amendments to the Constitution.

eh, no. for the 8000th time, the 10th amendment cannot be invoked to restrict, rescind or limit the natural rights affirmed in any other amendment. 2A says you have the right to keep and bear arms and it shall not be infringed. pretty clear. if a state wants to come along and restrict that right, they cannot argue 10th amendment protection because they are violating the protections of other amendments. look at it this way. let's say liberal, progressive new york or california finally decide that they will no longer allow white males to vote. protected under the 10th amendment? your logic says yes. constitution says otherwise...

so yeah, i know there are other amendments. you should take the time to read them and understand them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bhunted said:

You are going off base. They are brandishing.... Chest pounding, etc... That is provoking.....that is not concealed.

 

i quoted voyagers response, which was in response partially to this  ::::::: Simple yes or no should one carry concealed if they go to a Save Stonewall Jackson Statue Rally? Is there a way to make it a poll? I am really just curious as to the opinions here. :::::::::::::::::::. concealed carry is in no way provoking. on the other hand, if one were to do like the antifa tards did in pheonix? a few months back, and show up to a peaceful rally carrying all sorts of long guns openly....yea. that's provoking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i quoted voyagers response, which was in response partially to this  ::::::: Simple yes or no should one carry concealed if they go to a Save Stonewall Jackson Statue Rally? Is there a way to make it a poll? I am really just curious as to the opinions here. :::::::::::::::::::. concealed carry is in no way provoking. on the other hand, if one were to do like the antifa tards did in pheonix? a few months back, and show up to a peaceful rally carrying all sorts of long guns openly....yea. that's provoking.


I'm getting a lil frustrated here. I didn't say concealed is provoking. Brandishing is.

I'm done with this retarded thread. It went way off on a tangent.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1LtCAP said:

if you conceal carry at a rally, how are you provoking?

That's not what I said. There is a difference between someone who regularly CC and happens to attend a rally  and someone who Open carries an AR with hands on. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Indianajonze said:

eh, no. for the 8000th time, the 10th amendment cannot be invoked to restrict, rescind or limit the natural rights affirmed in any other amendment. 2A says you have the right to keep and bear arms and it shall not be infringed. pretty clear. if a state wants to come along and restrict that right, they cannot argue 10th amendment protection because they are violating the protections of other amendments. look at it this way. let's say liberal, progressive new york or california finally decide that they will no longer allow white males to vote. protected under the 10th amendment? your logic says yes. constitution says otherwise...

so yeah, i know there are other amendments. you should take the time to read them and understand them

Your statement "you should not have any more rights because you live in VA" demonstrate you really don't understand how things work.  Based on your statement no one should be able to open carry because you can't in NJ. You should be championing that right in VA, PA, AZ, and other states as OC has not created blood in the streets like in has in liberal venues like Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit, and more.  Your beef is with NJ not VA.  Maybe you'd be happy if the rest of the states had the same gun laws as NJ.

Saying someone shouldn't have a right in another state is childish and petty.  It shows you don't have an understanding of the Constitution.

You are in no position to instruct me on the Constitution.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, GRIZ said:

You are in no position to instruct me on the Constitution.

if you think the 10th amendment can be used to restrict the rights affirmed in other amendments, then i am absolutely in a position to instruct you, as you have no idea what the hell you're talking about. go read a book

 

anyway, my overall point is, open carry for everyone, everywhere. that is all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No state law can be in violation of the Constitution. The 10th can not be used to violate the 2nd. States have gotten away with it due to the Militia part. Just like a state could not violate the 1st Amendment because of the 10th.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Indianajonze said:

if you think the 10th amendment can be used to restrict the rights affirmed in other amendments, then i am absolutely in a position to instruct you, as you have no idea what the hell you're talking about. go read a book

 

anyway, my overall point is, open carry for everyone, everywhere. that is all

 

12 minutes ago, capt14k said:

No state law can be in violation of the Constitution. The 10th can not be used to violate the 2nd. States have gotten away with it due to the Militia part. Just like a state could not violate the 1st Amendment because of the 10th.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

As I said state laws can be more restrictive but not contrary.  For exampme, every state has laws regarding firearms transfers.  Some states require you to jump through hoops to buy a handgun.  Some states treat a handgun transfer like buying a screwdriver.  None deny you the right to have a handgun.  SCOTUS has heard cases based on state firearm laws.  Some they overturned, some they upheld.  You may not like all decisions but you know what? That's in the Constitution too. You need to understand the Constitution and it's scope.  SCOTUS interprets the law and that's that.  That's the way it is.  There have been many SCOTUS decisions I disagree with but have to live with.

 If you're going to uphold the Constitution you need to uphold all of it.  Not just the parts and interpretations you like.

Many rights are restricted.  You want to demonstrate?  You need a permit.  You want to fly as a passenger on a commercial aircraft? You must submit to a search.  You commit a crime that's a violation of both state and Federal law. You can be tried for the crime in both courts.  Etc, etc.

Some of those restrictions are beneficial, some are not.  I'm not defending any stupid laws.  Just telling it as it is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Griz you are correct however future SCOTUS can overturn incorrect decisions of previous SCOTUS. I believe both the incorrect interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and Overreach of the 14th Amendment will be overturned. When the 2nd Amendment is interpreted correctly laws that infringe on the ownership or carry of firearms will be ruled Unconstitutional. Once that happens no state can pass any law that will infringe on RTKB

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, capt14k said:

@Griz you are correct however future SCOTUS can overturn incorrect decisions of previous SCOTUS. I believe both the incorrect interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and Overreach of the 14th Amendment will be overturned. When the 2nd Amendment is interpreted correctly laws that infringe on the ownership or carry of firearms will be ruled Unconstitutional. Once that happens no state can pass any law that will infringe on RTKB

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...