Return to “MDA doesn't like 30.06”
I'm not allowed to say.Charles L. Cotton wrote:Just as I feared. Anyone still doubt that the in-your-face tactics to support open-carry hurt not only open-carry but concealed-carry as well?Russell wrote:As an aside, that article did drive a bit of traffic to my site. It also resulted in an increase in support tickets getting opened by clueless business owners asking for me to send them a 30.06 sign.
Chas.
But I suppose I can simply post 
without getting in trouble again.Then some ding dong will send the several thousand dollars and before we know it, Russell has decided to go into the 30.06 sign business.jmra wrote:Or quote them a price of several thousand dollars.apostate wrote:I think I would have a hard time not replying with a PDF of an invalid 30.06 sign. Perhaps the old VCS language at 75% scale.Russell wrote:As an aside, that article did drive a bit of traffic to my site. It also resulted in an increase in support tickets getting opened by clueless business owners asking for me to send them a 30.06 sign
I always respond with something along the lines of all they would accomplish by doing that is discriminating against their most law-abiding customers, criminals by their very definition care very little about signs. Unsurprisingly I never get a response back.
Russell wrote:As an aside, that article did drive a bit of traffic to my site. It also resulted in an increase in support tickets getting opened by clueless business owners asking for me to send them a 30.06 sign
I always respond with something along the lines of all they would accomplish by doing that is discriminating against their most law-abiding customers, criminals by their very definition care very little about signs. Unsurprisingly I never get a response back.
I would like extras for my friends if you can spare them. 
but I really did think we were on topic.No matter which home depot, I think you are still taking one heck of a risk in being the first one shot down if you are not brought to awareness by a person carrying an AR15 into any Home Depot.jimlongley wrote:Nope, and now I understand even less, because someone carrying a long gun in a non-threatening manner is not a threat, no matter where they are carrying, even in a Home Depot that I DON'T WORK AT in Plano TX. You make a very poor case.03Lightningrocks wrote:I think you understand but it suites your purposes to feign ignorance on the issue. I'll tell you something else that it seems nobody has said yet. If you really are of the mindset that a guy walking into the isle of the Home Depot you work at with an AR15, in PLANO TEXAS!, where nobody has any reason to be doing such a thing, I pray for your sake the guy is a bad shot.jimlongley wrote:I don't think I understand. Where were the long guns carried that they did not belong? Is there a law that says they did not belong? Are the areas posted? How does one determine where a legally carried firearm does not belong? Who gets to say where they do or do not belong? You? Me? Our opinions may differ greatly.03Lightningrocks wrote:Say what you will but this is 100% brought on by the OC radicals who carry long guns openly in places they do not belong. I truly believe it is their intention to do this as they perceive concealed carry permit holders as the enemy.
I may not agree with the tactics used, but if they were not doing something illegal, then they had a right to do it. Similar to the minority that stood up to Colonel Smith at that bridge, who were denounced as rabble and accused of making things worse for peaceful citizens, it might just be that these guys are the ones that set the wheels in motion to correct the wrongs forced upon us by our government, and they were doing something illegal.
Very well said. I need to pay you to give me writing lessons.The Annoyed Man wrote:I can't argue with you as far as our rights go. It's true. We have them. But there still remains the fact that a large part of the population apparently doesn't agree with us.......and they vote and they elect people who also don't agree with us. So the upshot is that regardless of what kind of kind of rights we actually have, a lot of people are not going to see them the same way as we do, and so people who openly carry an AR15 into Home Depot are going to continue to be carted off to the hoosegow until the lawyers can sort it all out.ShootDontTalk wrote:"I think you understand but it suites your purposes to feign ignorance on the issue. I'll tell you something else that it seems nobody has said yet. If you really are of the mindset that a guy walking into the isle of the Home Depot you work at with an AR15, in PLANO TEXAS!, where nobody has any reason to be doing such a thing, I pray for your sake the guy is a bad shot."
We have a Constitution and Bill of Rights that spell out inalienable rights granted to us by our Creator.You may not have a valid reason for doing what you do. Your neighbor may not think you have a reason. The action may not be seen as wise or even prudent. In fact, much of what we enjoy as the pursuit of happiness might seem idiotic by many people. The question is not do you or I think it reasonable. The question is what does the Constitution say? What does the law say? If it is not illegal, it meets the test. Many people think you and I have no reason to carry a concealed weapon in Home Depot. Thank God for America where it doesn't really matter what opinion you and I have when it comes to rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Such is the substance of freedom, whether we like it or not. My opinion, anyway.
But beyond that, context has a LOT to do with it. In the event of a real armed confrontation, you've got seconds or less to act. As far as I know, it isn't any more or less legal to carry a loaded long gun into a bank than a Home Depot, but I have to be perfectly honest and say that if I am in my bank and someone trots in carrying a Model 870 at port arms, I am not going to think to myself, "oh look.....another open carry guy". No, I am going to think "oh crap! We're being robbed!" and I'm going to react according to that tactical situation. And if I react by shooting the guy, "I was in fear for my life and I shot to stop the threat", will be a valid defense, whether or not he was just open carrying, or an actual bank robber. I might be wrong, but I think that I'd have an even chance of being no-billed. The reason is that a reasonable man might reasonably believe that a shotgun armed man entering a bank was there to rob the place and that a reasonable man might reasonably be in fear of his life.
That's not a statement about whether or not he should have the right to carry his 870 into a bank, it's about whether or not it is the smartest thing to do.
I think you understand but it suites your purposes to feign ignorance on the issue. I'll tell you something else that it seems nobody has said yet. If you really are of the mindset that a guy walking into the isle of the Home Depot you work at with an AR15, in PLANO TEXAS!, where nobody has any reason to be doing such a thing, I pray for your sake the guy is a bad shot.jimlongley wrote:I don't think I understand. Where were the long guns carried that they did not belong? Is there a law that says they did not belong? Are the areas posted? How does one determine where a legally carried firearm does not belong? Who gets to say where they do or do not belong? You? Me? Our opinions may differ greatly.03Lightningrocks wrote:Say what you will but this is 100% brought on by the OC radicals who carry long guns openly in places they do not belong. I truly believe it is their intention to do this as they perceive concealed carry permit holders as the enemy.
I may not agree with the tactics used, but if they were not doing something illegal, then they had a right to do it. Similar to the minority that stood up to Colonel Smith at that bridge, who were denounced as rabble and accused of making things worse for peaceful citizens, it might just be that these guys are the ones that set the wheels in motion to correct the wrongs forced upon us by our government, and they were doing something illegal.
