Delavan Starbucks OC Meet and Greet 1st Sunday of the Month 1-3pm

[benraines]

Don't Feed The Lib Trolls

Let them graze in their sheep pastures.

 

[>The_Liberal<]

Thank you all for your responses. I'm sure it's hard for some of you to talk to me.

Let me answer your questions to me. (it's only fair)
paul@paul-fisher.com,
"As for children, what are you trying to say?" I'm implying there's a risk to them both physical and mental.

Plankton,
"...why wouldn't you want them in an environment where honest, moral, law-abiding armed citizens were present?" I feel like there are safer ways to be concerned about children.

MKEgal,
"What's your point?" It will ultimately be that guns scare children. But let me try to ease into that one.
"You don't think children are worth protecting with the best available methods?" Of course I do. I simply disagree on the "best" method.

That said may I focus on paul@paul-fisher.com's statement: "2. See # 1. The other goal is to allow the general public to see that normal people carry guns."

For all the efforts of the open carry movement the act of walking around with a loaded semi-automatic gun out where is certainly rare. After all owning a gun is something that less than half of all Americans do in the first place. (source) With only 6 responses to my last post surely your group isn't very large.

Now I don't mean to insult anyone. I wouldn't dare do that on your forums. Just consider this:

1) Can a person be abnormal for the choices they make and the actions they take?
2) Is something rare also abnormal?
3) Is someone who carrys a loaded semi-automatic handgun a rare and abnormal person because they've chosen to do something unusual?

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

.....3) Is someone who carrys a loaded semi-automatic handgun a rare and abnormal person because they've chosen to do something unusual?

If we use the dictionary definitions as opposed to the stigmatized, emotional definition, then you would be right.

However, you contention that children are in physical danger is ill founded. A gun in a holster will NOT go off.

 

[Plankton]

Thank you all for your responses. I'm sure it's hard for some of you to talk to me.

Let me answer your questions to me. (it's only fair)
paul@paul-fisher.com,
"As for children, what are you trying to say?" I'm implying there's a risk to them both physical and mental.

Plankton,
"...why wouldn't you want them in an environment where honest, moral, law-abiding armed citizens were present?" I feel like there are safer ways to be concerned about children.

MKEgal,
"What's your point?" It will ultimately be that guns scare children. But let me try to ease into that one.
"You don't think children are worth protecting with the best available methods?" Of course I do. I simply disagree on the "best" method.

That said may I focus on paul@paul-fisher.com's statement: "2. See # 1. The other goal is to allow the general public to see that normal people carry guns."

For all the efforts of the open carry movement the act of walking around with a loaded semi-automatic gun out where is certainly rare. After all owning a gun is something that less than half of all Americans do in the first place. (source) With only 6 responses to my last post surely your group isn't very large.

Now I don't mean to insult anyone. I wouldn't dare do that on your forums. Just consider this:

1) Can a person be abnormal for the choices they make and the actions they take?
2) Is something rare also abnormal?
3) Is someone who carrys a loaded semi-automatic handgun a rare and abnormal person because they've chosen to do something unusual?

Since we seem to be focused on children, what is your "best" method of protecting them? For instance, how do you stop an active shooter in a school (Newtown, Columbine, VT, NIU, etc....)? Or, how does a single mother with two small children protect herself in a grocery store parking lot from multiple assailants?

 

[protias]

Thank you all for your responses. I'm sure it's hard for some of you to talk to me.

Let me answer your questions to me. (it's only fair)
paul@paul-fisher.com,
"As for children, what are you trying to say?" I'm implying there's a risk to them both physical and mental.

Plankton,
"...why wouldn't you want them in an environment where honest, moral, law-abiding armed citizens were present?" I feel like there are safer ways to be concerned about children.

MKEgal,
"What's your point?" It will ultimately be that guns scare children. But let me try to ease into that one.
"You don't think children are worth protecting with the best available methods?" Of course I do. I simply disagree on the "best" method.

That said may I focus on paul@paul-fisher.com's statement: "2. See # 1. The other goal is to allow the general public to see that normal people carry guns."

For all the efforts of the open carry movement the act of walking around with a loaded semi-automatic gun out where is certainly rare. After all owning a gun is something that less than half of all Americans do in the first place. (source) With only 6 responses to my last post surely your group isn't very large.

Now I don't mean to insult anyone. I wouldn't dare do that on your forums. Just consider this:

1) Can a person be abnormal for the choices they make and the actions they take?
2) Is something rare also abnormal?
3) Is someone who carrys a loaded semi-automatic handgun a rare and abnormal person because they've chosen to do something unusual?

Let me turn some of your questions right around.

You seem to be the only one asking these questions, so it seems your group is even smaller. People have busy lives and aren't as active as some of us. See how those statements can be used in direct attacks towards a particular group?

1) Since when is something "abnormal" illegal? You could say dying your hair pink is abnormal. Is that dangerous? I mean, the person could be in a gang...but then again, probably not.
2) No
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rare?s=t&path=/
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abnormal?s=t
3) No
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unusual?s=t

Are police abnormal? Are they rare? Are they unusual? Why would a law abiding citizen who carries then be defined as such? Crime is abnormal! Being a victim is abnormal!

 

[Phillip]

Thank you all for your responses. I'm sure it's hard for some of you to talk to me.

Let me answer your questions to me. (it's only fair)
paul@paul-fisher.com,
"As for children, what are you trying to say?" I'm implying there's a risk to them both physical and mental.

Plankton,
"...why wouldn't you want them in an environment where honest, moral, law-abiding armed citizens were present?" I feel like there are safer ways to be concerned about children.

MKEgal,
"What's your point?" It will ultimately be that guns scare children. But let me try to ease into that one.
"You don't think children are worth protecting with the best available methods?" Of course I do. I simply disagree on the "best" method.

That said may I focus on paul@paul-fisher.com's statement: "2. See # 1. The other goal is to allow the general public to see that normal people carry guns."

For all the efforts of the open carry movement the act of walking around with a loaded semi-automatic gun out where is certainly rare. After all owning a gun is something that less than half of all Americans do in the first place. (source) With only 6 responses to my last post surely your group isn't very large.

Now I don't mean to insult anyone. I wouldn't dare do that on your forums. Just consider this:

1) Can a person be abnormal for the choices they make and the actions they take?
2) Is something rare also abnormal?
3) Is someone who carrys a loaded semi-automatic handgun a rare and abnormal person because they've chosen to do something unusual?

You are correct, their little club is small and getting smaller by the month. Their meeting place in Kansasville, Wi was closed due to an eviction notice.

 

[davegran]

.... With only 6 responses to my last post surely your group isn't very large. ....

No, the limited number of responses is because most of us follow this advice:

And this will be my only response.

 

[>The_Liberal<]

Thank you for entertaining this conversation. Davegran does make a point, and I liked the visual. I do interpret questions as an invitation to answer them. If no one wants me here I'll certainly stop. I think it's interesting that a few of you will at least listen to me.

My answers to questions directed at me:
Plankton,
"...on children, what is your "best" method of protecting them?" The police. If that's not good enough for your children then a non-lethal weapon.

"For instance, how do you stop an active shooter in a school...?" Prevention is the key. If you know someone needs help then get it for them.

"Or, how does a single mother with two small children protect herself in a grocery store parking lot from multiple assailants?" Again that's where the police come in. It worked in this case.

protias,
"Since when is something "abnormal" illegal? I'll concede that simply being abnormal alone isn't or shouldn't be illegal.
"You could say dying your hair pink is abnormal. Is that dangerous?" Abnormal does not mean dangerous. It's simply not normal, average, typical, or usual; deviating from a standard. As the dictionary would define it.

If I may continue I'd like to say... Certainly lets use dictionary definitions. It's only fair to use the same language.

Let me connect rare to abnormal. Look at the 2nd definition for abnormal as an adjective (since I used it as such). Follow the links and you'll see it's synonymous with strange witch is synonymous with odd witch is synonymous with rare. This being that something rare is abnormal.

Let me start with another minor point. At some point you have to admit that guns are in fact dangerous. Why else would the Nation Rifle Association be teaching safety classes on them.

So, could you please tell me.

Wouldn't someone be alarmed by something that is both dangerous and rare?
If so, Wouldn't children be afraid of someone carrying a loaded handgun out in the open?

 

[protias]

I'll have to break this up as it will be easier to read.

Thank you for entertaining this conversation. Davegran does make a point, and I liked the visual. I do interpret questions as an invitation to answer them. If no one wants me here I'll certainly stop. I think it's interesting that a few of you will at least listen to me.

My answers to questions directed at me:
Plankton,
"...on children, what is your "best" method of protecting them?" The police. If that's not good enough for your children then a non-lethal weapon.

And when the police are no where to be found? In my town, it takes them at least 3-5 minutes to get to you. In Milwaukee, they may not show up at all. How fast can a bad guy make your day even worse?

"For instance, how do you stop an active shooter in a school...?" Prevention is the key. If you know someone needs help then get it for them.

So how do locked schools prevent crime? Columbine was locked. How many people died? Sandy Hook was locked. How many people died? Prevention doesn't stop crime. Force does. You don't tell a bully to stop or he'll get detention. He'll continue to bully until he gets the crap beaten out of him!

"Or, how does a single mother with two small children protect herself in a grocery store parking lot from multiple assailants?" Again that's where the police come in. It worked in this case.

How did that work for Warren (see Warren vs DC)? Where were the police?

protias,
"Since when is something "abnormal" illegal? I'll concede that simply being abnormal alone isn't or shouldn't be illegal.
"You could say dying your hair pink is abnormal. Is that dangerous?" Abnormal does not mean dangerous. It's simply not normal, average, typical, or usual; deviating from a standard. As the dictionary would define it.

If I may continue I'd like to say... Certainly lets use dictionary definitions. It's only fair to use the same language.

Let me connect rare to abnormal. Look at the 2nd definition for abnormal as an adjective (since I used it as such). Follow the links and you'll see it's synonymous with strange witch is synonymous with odd witch is synonymous with rare. This being that something rare is abnormal.

Let me start with another minor point. At some point you have to admit that guns are in fact dangerous. Why else would the Nation Rifle Association be teaching safety classes on them.

So, could you please tell me.

Wouldn't someone be alarmed by something that is both dangerous and rare?
If so, Wouldn't children be afraid of someone carrying a loaded handgun out in the open?

Firearms are deadly, but so are hammers, fists, feet, clubs, baseball bats, scissors, screw drivers, rocks, lead pipes, 2x4, etc, etc, etc. And yet we don't call for legislation on them! You can read the FBI data here: http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_08.html

 

[Plankton]

Thank you for entertaining this conversation. Davegran does make a point, and I liked the visual. I do interpret questions as an invitation to answer them. If no one wants me here I'll certainly stop. I think it's interesting that a few of you will at least listen to me.

My answers to questions directed at me:
Plankton,
"...on children, what is your "best" method of protecting them?" The police. If that's not good enough for your children then a non-lethal weapon.

"For instance, how do you stop an active shooter in a school...?" Prevention is the key. If you know someone needs help then get it for them.

"Or, how does a single mother with two small children protect herself in a grocery store parking lot from multiple assailants?" Again that's where the police come in. It worked in this case.

protias,
"Since when is something "abnormal" illegal? I'll concede that simply being abnormal alone isn't or shouldn't be illegal.
"You could say dying your hair pink is abnormal. Is that dangerous?" Abnormal does not mean dangerous. It's simply not normal, average, typical, or usual; deviating from a standard. As the dictionary would define it.

If I may continue I'd like to say... Certainly lets use dictionary definitions. It's only fair to use the same language.

Let me connect rare to abnormal. Look at the 2nd definition for abnormal as an adjective (since I used it as such). Follow the links and you'll see it's synonymous with strange witch is synonymous with odd witch is synonymous with rare. This being that something rare is abnormal.

Let me start with another minor point. At some point you have to admit that guns are in fact dangerous. Why else would the Nation Rifle Association be teaching safety classes on them.

So, could you please tell me.

Wouldn't someone be alarmed by something that is both dangerous and rare?
If so, Wouldn't children be afraid of someone carrying a loaded handgun out in the open?

So, you can cite ONE instance where the police stopped a crime? Now I feel safer. You DO know why the police carry guns? To protect themselves. They are under NO obligation to protect you or I. Multiple Supreme Court rulings have stated that. You didn't answer my other question: HOW DO YOU STOP AN ACTIVE SHOOTER IN A SCHOOL? Prevention? The active shooter is ALREADY in the school. And how, again, do the police protect my children and grandchildren? Are the police with me every minute of every day? Hardly. Nor can they be. These are very simple questions; non answers do not cut it here in the real world.

To your last query:
"Wouldn't someone be alarmed by something that is both dangerous and rare?
If so, Wouldn't children be afraid of someone carrying a loaded handgun out in the open?"

Not MY children (or grandchildren). The safest place for a firearm in public, is in a retention holster. Children that have been educated on ignorance and fear of firearms may end up afraid; children that have been educated on the safe handling and use of firearms, not so much. Why would anyone want to keep their children fearful and ignorant of inanimate objects? That sounds abnormal to me.

 

[Plankton]

You are correct, their little club is small and getting smaller by the month. Their meeting place in Kansasville, Wi was closed due to an eviction notice.

Buh Bye. :lol:

 

[rcawdor57]

It's Really Very Simple. Show Up And Speak To Us In Person.

Show up this Sunday and announce yourself (the two "people" posting questions about open carry). You know where we will be from 1300 to 1500 on Sunday. Stop by and say hello and talk. It's real simple.

 

[Phillip]

Let them graze in their sheep pastures.

benraines, I hope you can make it Sunday and talk about stuff. Simply put, Sunday is a grazing day for me.

 

[>The_Liberal<]

Thank you again for your responses. I'm learning some interesting things about your group and how gun owners think. After that initial backlash I'm starting to think this is really pleasant.

To answer question directed at me.

And when the police are no where to be found?

One should probably call them. 911 Is set up to work even on phone that don't normally work.

How fast can a bad guy make your day even worse?

Very fast, but so could a "good guy." It seems kind of moot.

How did that work for Warren (see Warren vs DC)?

After looking at that case I think I disagree with the court. This one case it seems the police were negligent.

Where were the police?

To answer literally: 300 Indiana Avenue, Washington, DC 20001, but that's probably not what you meant.

You didn't answer my other question: HOW DO YOU STOP AN ACTIVE SHOOTER IN A SCHOOL? Prevention?

So, there's an internet rumor about that mass shooters kill an average of 2 people when stopped by gun owners and 14 when stopped by police. Even if this is true (I couldn't find any research to support it). How about supporting the metal health system by reporting unstable people. That would mean 0 people die from what would otherwise be a mass shooting. Even the otherwise pro-mass shooting National Rifle Association is for this.

Why would anyone want to keep their children fearful and ignorant of inanimate objects?

I'm too busy teaching them not to be fearful and ignorant of people. If something is dangerous you should respect and fear it.

That said. I'd like to try and press this gun scare children thing. After all they do. I don't see anyone trying to refute that semi-automatic handguns are dangerous. And that carrying them around is rare and unusual. So can I ask:

Is there a legitimate reason for someone to be afraid of someone carrying a loaded semi-automatic handgun?

Would it be too much to ask to at lease carry just automatic handguns than the semi-automatic guns used in so many mass-shootings that spray-fired many people during those tragic events?

Or maybe not use assault clips that carry up 100 bullets?

Show up this Sunday and announce yourself (the two "people" posting questions about open carry). You know where we will be from 1300 to 1500 on Sunday. Stop by and say hello and talk. It's real simple.

I thought you'd never ask. Just that I'll probably be quiet certainly not announce myself. When I started this conversation I received much aggression. Being called such things as rabblerouser, troll, and sheep. Although I am a sheep and Jesus is my shepard (the real one not Mr. Gonzalez). I wouldn't feel comfortable announcing myself. I'll be there around 2pm I gotta work that day.

Could I convince you to talk about that warren vs DC things right around 2pm?

 

[MKEgal]

And when the police are no where to be found?

One should probably call [police].

:banghead: So when the police aren't around, and don't respond to a call for help, we should just call police.
That's assuming that the attacker lets you get to a phone & call even once.
Do you really think he'll stand there & wait to attack you further until police arrive?

I'd like to try and press this gun scare children thing. After all they do.

Except that they don't. I've taught a couple hundred children gun safety, shooting rifles & pistols. None of them was scared.
Kids learn bad behaviours from their parents. If the parents are educated & realistic, the kids will be too. And it's even possible to correct the mis-education of children whose parents are hoplophobes.
I've had kids walk up & ask me questions in public - not afraid a bit.

Is there a legitimate reason for someone to be afraid of someone carrying a loaded semi-automatic handgun?

Unless it's pointed at you (or another innocent), no.

Would it be too much to ask to at lease carry just automatic handguns than the semi-automatic guns used in so many mass-shootings that spray-fired many people during those tragic events?
Or maybe not use assault clips that carry up 100 bullets?

Try again... I think you missed a couple of cliches there. Your ignorance is showing more than ever.
Yes, it's too much to ask that everyone carry automatic firearms.
They're rare, expensive, heavily regulated, & harder to control when firing (so less safe).

Could I convince you to talk about that warren vs DC things right around 2pm?

Join us & raise the topic.

Here's a detailed essay addressing many of the common gun-control myths & propositions, written by Larry Correia.
In the first part he gives his resume, so you can see he knows what he's talking about.
Well worth reading, though I think you're actually in the second or third group.
http://www.mikehuckabee.com/2013/1/an-opinion-on-gun-control

 

[Plankton]

Thank you again for your responses. I'm learning some interesting things about your group and how gun owners think. After that initial backlash I'm starting to think this is really pleasant.

To answer question directed at me.

One should probably call them. 911 Is set up to work even on phone that don't normally work.


Very fast, but so could a "good guy." It seems kind of moot.


After looking at that case I think I disagree with the court. This one case it seems the police were negligent.


To answer literally: 300 Indiana Avenue, Washington, DC 20001, but that's probably not what you meant.


So, there's an internet rumor about that mass shooters kill an average of 2 people when stopped by gun owners and 14 when stopped by police. Even if this is true (I couldn't find any research to support it). How about supporting the metal health system by reporting unstable people. That would mean 0 people die from what would otherwise be a mass shooting. Even the otherwise pro-mass shooting National Rifle Association is for this.


I'm too busy teaching them not to be fearful and ignorant of people. If something is dangerous you should respect and fear it.

That said. I'd like to try and press this gun scare children thing. After all they do. I don't see anyone trying to refute that semi-automatic handguns are dangerous. And that carrying them around is rare and unusual. So can I ask:

Is there a legitimate reason for someone to be afraid of someone carrying a loaded semi-automatic handgun?

Would it be too much to ask to at lease carry just automatic handguns than the semi-automatic guns used in so many mass-shootings that spray-fired many people during those tragic events?

Or maybe not use assault clips that carry up 100 bullets?



I thought you'd never ask. Just that I'll probably be quiet certainly not announce myself. When I started this conversation I received much aggression. Being called such things as rabblerouser, troll, and sheep. Although I am a sheep and Jesus is my shepard (the real one not Mr. Gonzalez). I wouldn't feel comfortable announcing myself. I'll be there around 2pm I gotta work that day.

Could I convince you to talk about that warren vs DC things right around 2pm?

www.gunssavelives.net They do. Every day. BTW, I have open carried a loaded firearm for 3 1/2 years in Madistan, with zero negative interactions. None. Zero. I have had people THANK me for carrying. Abnormal, I guess.

 

[protias]

www.gunsavelives.net

Don't forget http://gunfacts.info/

 

[Phillip]

Don't forget http://gunfacts.info/

Guy Smith is a self proclaimed political provocateur.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/provocateur?s=t

 

[Phillip]

www.gunsavelives.net They do. Every day. BTW, I have open carried a loaded firearm for 3 1/2 years in Madistan, with zero negative interactions. None. Zero. I have had people THANK me for carrying. Abnormal, I guess.

The website posted is of no use. That domain name is for sale.

 

[Plankton]

The website posted is of no use. That domain name is for sale.

www.gunssavelives.net Try this one, Jeri. :lol: