A Call for Sanity in the Gun Debate

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**whembly**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Ahtman wrote:
All I really know about the p90 is that they were really popular in Goldeneye multiplayer.

I first seen it in Counter Strike (when it was bundled with Half Life, and on disc). I've been fascinated with it since then because of it's design and the fact that it was so different to many other firearms.

I just remember the p90 from one of the Call of Duty games... and dual-wielding that was epic.

**Breotan**

So, we have a bit of an update that's related to these Open Carry idiots. Let's file this under, "This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things."

http://news.yahoo.com/target-goes-gun-free-becoming-biggest-us-retailer-202500592.html

Patrik Jonsson, Christian Science Monitor wrote:Target goes gun-free, becoming biggest US retailer asking customers to disarm

Moms Demand Action has launched online petitions against corporations after members of open-carry groups brought loaded assault-style firearms into stores. In the case of Target, 400,000 signatures were collected.

The decision by Target, one of America’s largest retailers, to ask its customers to please not carry firearms to its stores anymore marks another surprising victory for gun control groups, which have rallied for attention and impact after the 2012 Sandy Hook school massacre.

Moms Demand Action, a part of the Everytown for Gun Safety consortium, which is funded by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, now has six notches in its belt after targeting major corporations with online petitions and protests. In the case of Target, 400,000 signatures were collected. Chili’s, Starbucks, Chipotle, Sonic, and Jack in the Box have all responded to petitions by specifically asking customers to shop and/or eat unarmed.

Target is by far the biggest retailer to date to concede to the demands of Moms Demand Action. Target’s competitor Wal-Mart is the country’s largest firearms seller and has noted that it doesn’t plan to make any policy changes on gun carry.

The petitions have come in response to demonstrations by so-called open-carry groups where members bring loaded assault-style firearms into stores. Those tactics have sparked a rare public backlash against public gun carry and introspection among gun owners in a country where states recently have, on the whole, pushed laws strengthening gun and self-defense rights.

To be sure, gun rights groups point out that some recent corporate policy changes are meaningless since they don’t actually ban guns, but simply request nicely that customers don’t bring them. But after the pressure on corporations like Starbucks and now Target to change their policy on guns, it’s clear that what Moms Demand Action calls its “common-sense” approach on the Second Amendment is winning converts, and at least shifting the weight slightly on the long-running tug of war between pro-gun lobbyists like the National Rifle Association and gun control and antiviolence organizations.

“Moms everywhere were horrified to see images of people carrying loaded assault rifles down the same aisles where we shop for diapers and toys,” said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, after Target’s announcement Wednesday. “... Target recognized that moms are a powerful customer base and political force – and you can respect the 2nd Amendment and the safety of customers at the same time."

The open-carry demonstrations and ensuing petitions have been discomfiting for US corporations, which have in the past mostly allowed local ordinances to dictate whether customers could bring guns to their stores. Target, especially, is in a tough spot after alienating some of its customer base with its handling of a massive data breach that took place around Thanksgiving last year.

Coming out with an antigun policy is a potentially risky move that could alienate large swaths of the buying public. But in the end, Target could have been more worried about the effects of a month-long #OffTarget social media campaign, urging mothers to shop at other stores until Target changed its policy. The retailer’s stock price rose slightly Wednesday on the news.

“This is a complicated issue, but it boils down to a simple belief: Bringing firearms to Target creates an environment that is at odds with the family-friendly shopping and work experience we strive to create,” Target interim CEO John Mulligan said on the company blog. “[S]tarting today we will … respectfully request that guests not bring firearms to Target – even in communities where it is permitted by law.”

Target has 1,700 stores in the United States and made about $70 billion in revenue last year. It doesn’t sell firearms.

The NRA, in a blog post in May, chastised open-carry demonstrations as “weird” and ultimately damaging to gun rights. But chief NRA lobbyist Chris Cox later walked back those comments, saying that calling open-carry protests “weird or somehow not normal was a mistake.”

After Target’s announcement, at least some gun owners acknowledged that the move suggests gun control groups are winning this battle.

“They have been generating outrage and delivering it to companies who will listen. We have been sitting on blogs complaining about [Open Carry Texas], open carry, the state of Texas, and anything else we can think of to make ourselves feel superior while the antis were – quite effectively – lobbying for a policy change,” writes “Dave,” a commenter on the well-read “Shall Not Be Questioned” blog. “Their strategy was superior. [T]hat’s a bitter pill, but the fact is the other side beat us at a game we have traditionally owned.”

http://www.pagunblog.com/2014/07/02/targets-statement-on-open-carry/#comments

**Jihadin**

Knife Hands are more dangerous

**Breotan**

One of the posters on the blog I linked to at the bottom of the quoted article made this observation...

That really does show how the rifle-OC people are more 2nd-Amend cosplayers

**Jihadin**

Knife Hands though..

CAMP SHELBY, MS - The Army’s Warrior Leader Course is a big step in a soldiers’ progression to Staff Sergeant. Sergeants take part in field leadership exercises, physical training, and operations. But for Sergeant Nathan Brown, his behavior at the course means he’ll have to try again.

Brown, an Infantryman (11B) from 155BCT, was attending the Warrior Leader Course to further his career and make himself eligible for promotion. His record was impeccable until a recent exercise at the Urban Operations (MOUT) town. He was armed with twenty blank rounds — already expended moments after the exercise began. When tasked with clearing a room, he went with the only option he had left – his knife hands.

Administrative specialist SPC Katherine Young was present the day that SGT Brown lost control.

“It was horrible. I was playing OPFOR. I thought it would be fun to yell ‘safety kill’ as someone came in the room. I had no idea what SGT Brown was capable of. I thought he was such a sweet man.” Young stops to wipe away tears at this point and continued, “He did a flying bicycle kick against the door, knocking it off the hinges. After that he turned to me with this look in his eyes: the only way to describe it is blood lust. I looked down and saw he had his knife hands at the ready.”

At this point, SGT Brown was heading straight for Young, knife hands fully unsheathed.

“I didn’t know what to do. I just started screaming for help. ‘Someone please stop him’ I yelled over and over. It was no use; he attacked me uncontrollably with those terrible, terrible, killing machines.”

The TMC at Camp Shelby treated SPC Young for minor wounds. She was returned to duty the same day, but with stipulations. TMC Doctor COL Bob Gearhart commented, “She’s a brave soul, having gone through such trauma and still being willing to return to duty. While her physical wounds are superficial, the mental wounds inflicted by knife hands can sometimes be more traumatizing and may stay with her for her entire life.”

SSG Bagely, an instructor at the 3rd NCO Academy issued the following statement on behalf of the Academy:

“What happened here was truly tragic. Knife hands are a dangerous tool that should be used only in the most dire of situations. We here at the 3rd NCO Academy do not tolerate this kind of behavior and are deeply sorry for the trauma that has been caused to the other soldiers enrolled in the course. The situation is currently under investigation and will be resolved as soon as possible.”

SGT Brown was unable to comment at the time of this publication as he is in the custody of the Camp Shelby PMO awaiting a military hearing. SPC Young is currently in counseling for Post Traumatic Stress.

**Seaward**

Target can ask all it wants. I have a valid Virginia concealed carry permit, and Virginia law allows me to ignore their request and carry concealed in Target stores to my heart's content.

**Jihadin**

I just keep my hands in my pockets

**motyak**

Seaward wrote:
Target can ask all it wants. I have a valid Virginia concealed carry permit, and Virginia law allows me to ignore their request and carry concealed in Target stores to my heart's content.

Do they have to give you access to their store? I'm genuinely asking, I'm not sure if being a large store means they count as public sort of, or if they are a store so they count as private and therefore can ask you to leave for whatever reason they want.

**Seaward**

motyak wrote:
Do they have to give you access to their store? I'm genuinely asking, I'm not sure if being a large store means they count as public sort of, or if they are a store so they count as private and therefore can ask you to leave for whatever reason they want.

Nope.

But, having carried concealed for quite a while now, I've never had anyone even once notice that I'm doing so, so I'm fairly confident that the eighteen year-olds at the checkout counters aren't going to pick up on it, either.

**motyak**

Seaward wrote:
motyak wrote:
Do they have to give you access to their store? I'm genuinely asking, I'm not sure if being a large store means they count as public sort of, or if they are a store so they count as private and therefore can ask you to leave for whatever reason they want.

Nope.

But, having carried concealed for quite a while now, I've never had anyone even once notice that I'm doing so, so I'm fairly confident that the eighteen year-olds at the checkout counters aren't going to pick up on it, either.

Good point, the whole idea of CC is that someone can't see it. So...how would they know.

**sebster**

Seaward wrote:
Nope.

But, having carried concealed for quite a while now, I've never had anyone even once notice that I'm doing so, so I'm fairly confident that the eighteen year-olds at the checkout counters aren't going to pick up on it, either.

And even if he notices it... it's an 18 year old kid. His only priority is to pay as little attention as possible through his entire shift, because all he wants to do is go home and play minecraft. He's not going to make a scene if you're not making a scene.

**Ensis Ferrae**

motyak wrote:
Seaward wrote:
Target can ask all it wants. I have a valid Virginia concealed carry permit, and Virginia law allows me to ignore their request and carry concealed in Target stores to my heart's content.

Do they have to give you access to their store? I'm genuinely asking, I'm not sure if being a large store means they count as public sort of, or if they are a store so they count as private and therefore can ask you to leave for whatever reason they want.

Basically speaking, from what I've seen/gathered (and this depends on your locale) ANY company can put up a sign that reads "please no guns" or "no guns allowed"... But unless they are backed by law, and you have a carry permit (some places it's for any carry, not just concealed) , you can carry into that establishment... This means all those Chipotle, Starbucks and Targets of the world are still open for you to carry in. Of course, the usual places where you cannot carry no matter what still apply (banks, gov't buildings and the like)

The thing is, if an employee/manager/security sees you carrying (if it's conceal carry, you're not doing it right if they do see) and asks you to leave, you DO then have a legal obligation to leave at that point, otherwise you are trespassing.

**Frazzled**

In gun circles, especially on the Texas side, there is a very large group of people that believe at least some of these guys are antigunner plants.

I don't think fatman and snowboots are plants though. They're just too stupid looking.

Pro-tip. If you have to carry in a tacticool AR that costs more than your car to get a bag of Oreos, you're doing it wrong.

**LordofHats**

Frazzled wrote:

Pro-tip. If you have to carry in a tacticool AR that costs more than your car to get a bag of Oreos, you're doing it wrong.

But what if the government comes to take his gun away while he's out getting oreos?! What will he fight tyranny with then!

**Frazzled**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
motyak wrote:
Seaward wrote:
Target can ask all it wants. I have a valid Virginia concealed carry permit, and Virginia law allows me to ignore their request and carry concealed in Target stores to my heart's content.

Do they have to give you access to their store? I'm genuinely asking, I'm not sure if being a large store means they count as public sort of, or if they are a store so they count as private and therefore can ask you to leave for whatever reason they want.

Basically speaking, from what I've seen/gathered (and this depends on your locale) ANY company can put up a sign that reads "please no guns" or "no guns allowed"... But unless they are backed by law, and you have a carry permit (some places it's for any carry, not just concealed) , you can carry into that establishment... This means all those Chipotle, Starbucks and Targets of the world are still open for you to carry in. Of course, the usual places where you cannot carry no matter what still apply (banks, gov't buildings and the like)

The thing is, if an employee/manager/security sees you carrying (if it's conceal carry, you're not doing it right if they do see) and asks you to leave, you DO then have a legal obligation to leave at that point, otherwise you are trespassing.

It depends on the state. IN some states simple gunbuster signs are enough. In Texas you have to put up a very specific and very obnoxious sign.

The wife however is from Chicago. They have a more flexible view of laws.
SWMBO: " They're opening a new Sprouts (hippy treehugger grocery store) right by us. Hurray!"
Frazzled: "I'll never step inside it. They are unabashedly 30.06 (sign type required by law)"
SWMBO: "Don't sass me boy. Signs are merely guidelines."
Frazzled: "yes dear."

**d-usa**

Seems fitting:

**hotsauceman1**

the Reason the NRA backed off is because the people keeping them afloat are these type of people.
I can understand concealed or open carry of a hand-gun. I can understand owning these rifles for sport shooting.
But why would you bring one of those into a target? How is that more safer then another gun? Not only that, but the way I see these idiots carry it, it looks like the perfect angle and height to reach a little kids head.
Trust me, that is going to happen some day soon.

**Dreadclaw69**

Seaward wrote:
Target can ask all it wants. I have a valid Virginia concealed carry permit, and Virginia law allows me to ignore their request and carry concealed in Target stores to my heart's content.

Part of my feels that Target is studiously not taking a side on this, and both sides are claiming victory. Besides, don't they have to display a no guns sign for this to have any legal force?

Frazzled wrote:
In gun circles, especially on the Texas side, there is a very large group of people that believe at least some of these guys are antigunner plants.

This has been mentioned by a few people across several gun sites. OCT are just the gift that keeps on giving.... to the gun control crowd

**d-usa**

Why worry about Brady and Co. when those idiots do all the work for them...

**Dreadclaw69**

d-usa wrote:
Why worry about Brady and Co. when those idiots do all the work for them...

Because one group is undermining the pro-gun position, the others are spreading mis-information and skewing facts to mislead public opinion. They are both working toward the same end, regardless of intention

**edited for potential confusion from use of "your" **

**MWHistorian**

d-usa wrote:
Why worry about Brady and Co. when those idiots do all the work for them...

Seriously.

In my circles* I don't know anyone that supports what those jackwagons did. They just give pro 2nd side a bad name.

*I'm a moderator on a gun forum, so it's not just a close group of friends.

**cincydooley**

MWHistorian wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Why worry about Brady and Co. when those idiots do all the work for them...

Seriously.
In my circles* I don't know anyone that supports what those jackwagons did. They just give pro 2nd side a bad name.

*I'm a moderator on a gun forum, so it's not just a close group of friends.

Agree here. I was actually proud when the NRA spoke against it, and then saddened with they retracted their stance.

I think Open Carry of handguns is fine. I don't think open carry of rifles makes any sense. I think we should be able to own whatever the feth we want, but there's literally no functional reason to carry your rifle around with you.

Not to mention half these fools have so much gak on their rifles that I have trouble believing they use them regularly.

**BrotherGecko**

Jihadin wrote:Knife Hands are more dangerous

And I say a Hoah!

Breotan wrote:One of the posters on the blog I linked to at the bottom of the quoted article made this observation...

That really does show how the rifle-OC people are more 2nd-Amend cosplayers

They definitely look like MLG COD players doing their best to try and become a 2nd Amendment cosplayer. Mimicing the silliness of some "private contractors" and the awkwardness of a forever on the FOB warrior is hilarious and sad. Try carring that stuff for hours on end. They might realize that the people they wish they were, prefer minimum junk on their weapon. Optic and maybe a flashlight...maybe.

If you want to OC like they way that those guys are. Try enlisting into the service and doing it for real. Actually no...please do not. The last thing the military needs is more people like that.

Also who the hell wears their weapon slung at the low ready like that? Its just going to slap you in the nuts the whole time you are walking.

**d-usa**

Here is the point ---> .

Here is everybody else <--------------------------------------------------

What has Brady actually accomplished in regards to gun rights over the last decade?

What have these guys managed to accomplish in regards to gun rights in the last year alone?

More private businesses are now anti-carry because of those idiots and more people see gun owners as idiots because of those guys. They even managed to use their influence to drag the credibility of the NRA down with them. There have not been that many gun-restrictions passed, and more pro-gun laws were passed in the last decade than anti-gun. Laws expired and others were overturned.

Brady is a well known group of idiots that twist statistics to try to make their point and influence legislation. But other than legislators hardly anybody even knows what they are saying or pays any attention to them. These idiots are on the news a lot, people know about "those idiots that just run around everywhere with their assault rifles".

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And more stupid news:

http://www.guns.com/2014/07/02/first-day-of-georgias-new-gun-law-man-draws-on-fellow-open-carrier/

**Frazzled**

cincydooley wrote:
MWHistorian wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Why worry about Brady and Co. when those idiots do all the work for them...

Seriously.
In my circles* I don't know anyone that supports what those jackwagons did. They just give pro 2nd side a bad name.

*I'm a moderator on a gun forum, so it's not just a close group of friends.

Agree here. I was actually proud when the NRA spoke against it, and then saddened with they retracted their stance.

I think Open Carry of handguns is fine. I don't think open carry of rifles makes any sense. I think we should be able to own whatever the feth we want, but there's literally no functional reason to carry your rifle around with you.

Not to mention half these fools have so much gak on their rifles that I have trouble believing they use them regularly.

Open carry makes perfect sense in the areas its traditionally used.
*Rural environments
*Your own land
*When travelling.

**d-usa**

People might not be used to open carrying, but I think even handguns would be much less of a deal even with people that are not a fan of it. People are more used to seeing guns on hips than rifles, so even if they don't agree with it is not "that" unusual to see and they would probably freak out a lot less.

The only place I have OC'd so far has been when visiting my dad and helping him round up the cows that got loose.

**Dreadclaw69**

d-usa wrote:
And more stupid news:

http://www.guns.com/2014/07/02/first-day-of-georgias-new-gun-law-man-draws-on-fellow-open-carrier/

The guy had no right, nor business, to ask someone else for his permit. Mush less draw his firearm. People familiar with the arrested person have said that he frequently asks people for ID when they try to buy alcohol/cigarettes and he isn't an employee. Just an interfering busy body.

But note the reaction of the responsible gun owner. He didn't escalate. He didn't provoke any further confrontation. He paid for his items, left, and informed the police. The exact opposite of what may pro-control groups claim will happen when open carry occurs more widely

**Frazzled**

Wow he ignored the other guy, paid for his stuff and left. I'm impressed. Pull a gun on me and I'll immediately empty a mag into you. THEN I'll call the police.

**cincydooley**

d-usa wrote:
People might not be used to open carrying, but I think even handguns would be much less of a deal even with people that are not a fan of it. People are more used to seeing guns on hips than rifles, so even if they don't agree with it is not "that" unusual to see and they would probably freak out a lot less.

Agreed.

Honestly, through this whole thing I've been trying to find situations in my every day life where it would "make sense" for me to carry a long gun on me, but they simply don't exist.

Any situation where I'd need to protect myself can pretty much be satisfied, for me, by a handgun.

Now, if martial law were to be instilled, or I lived on a farm or ranch, I could potentially see more "make's sense" opportunities, but I don't.

But then again, my two HD guns are a shotgun and a .40, so I don't even use my rifles for HD. I use them for hunting and sporting pretty exclusively.

**hotsauceman1**

Frazzled wrote:
Wow he ignored the other guy, paid for his stuff and left. I'm impressed. Pull a gun on me and I'll immediately empty a mag into you. THEN I'll call the police.

How many Rounds can an aassault weiner carry? 10? 15?