[The Final Dakar]

Yeah, another gun thread, because why the hell not.

Two men carrying assault rifles on their backs said they were simply exercising their Second Amendment right, but police said they scared plenty of people.

Officers arrived in the area and contacted both 22-year-old men. They were carrying rifles openly on their backs and were valid concealed handgun license holders in Oregon.

The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.

Officers explained that they were likely to continue generating 911 calls from alarmed people in the area, which would require a police response. Officers reported neither man seemed interested in those concerns.

"Exercising my rights with a rifle to try to decrease the demonizing of peacefully exercising your rights in public," one of the men told Fox 12. He said his name is Warren, but did not want to provide a last name.

Warren said he hoped people would approach them and talk to them, instead of calling police.

"What they really should do is observe the person to determine if the person is aggressive," he said of seeing someone with a gun in public. "We're not doing anything threatening to anyone."

The Portland Police Bureau, however, asks anyone who sees someone armed with guns to immediately call 911.

Is this as retarded as it sounds?

[Shaddim]

Yes, on both sides.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Yes, on both sides.

You'll have to be more specific about that. What's retarded by the gun non-owners (or is it the cops)?

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Yes, on both sides.

Nope, only on the part of these two idiots carrying the guns openly in public just to make a point.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Rosa Parks they aint

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

You'll have to be more specific about that. What's retarded by the gun non-owners (or is it the cops)?

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

Nope, only on the part of these two idiots carrying the guns openly in public just to make a point.

Well...

The Portland Police Bureau, however, asks anyone who sees someone armed with guns to immediately call 911.

That's not too specific. I can see a lot of brouhaha being generated over citizens with CWPs (and plain clothes detectives), and folks needlessly clogging up the 911 system when they see a shoulder or belt holster.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Rosa Parks they aint

This. Reminds me of the gay "love-ins" at Chik-Fil-A and similar places. Just people causing drama because they can, leading to a disturbance of the peace. I'm thinking, "C'mon, really?"

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Well...



That's not too specific. I can see a lot of brouhaha being generated over citizens with CWPs (and plain clothes detectives), and folks needlessly clogging up the 911 system when they see a shoulder or belt holster.

CONCEALED means, well, CONCEALED.

Carrying a concealed handgun is a lot different than carrying a rifle slung across your back on a city street.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

CONCEALED means, well, CONCEALED.

Carrying a concealed handgun is a lot different than carrying a rifle slung across your back on a city street.

Well, like others who carry, oftentimes your handgun isn't perfectly hidden, because clothing moves. Many times I've casually mentioned, "it's okay, I have a license" when someone has caught a glimpse of my holster. Lately I've simply taken to clipping my badge to it, and that immediately answers any questions.

[screener]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Well, like others who carry, oftentimes your handgun isn't perfectly hidden, because clothing moves. Many times I've casually mentioned, "it's okay, I have a license" when someone has caught a glimpse of my holster. Lately I've simply taken to clipping my badge to it, and that immediately answers any questions.

Geez.

[raleur]

Originally Posted by screener 

Geez.

No, it really works. I casually wear my badge on my belt when I'm toting my guns. If someone still seems agitated, my assistants will take them aside and show them my licenses.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

CONCEALED means, well, CONCEALED.

Carrying a concealed handgun is a lot different than carrying a rifle slung across your back on a city street.

Yeah, here you don't even need a permit to carry unconcealed. They need to do this enough that people relearn that a weapon itself has/implies no motive. And the cops will get sick of the 911 calls and change their stupid policy. At least they were smart enough not to arrest them.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

That's not too specific. I can see a lot of brouhaha being generated over citizens with CWPs (and plain clothes detectives), and folks needlessly clogging up the 911 system when they see a shoulder or belt holster.

I think calling the cops when seeing two armed men is a perfectly reasonable response. Their behavior is clearly suspicious, the American cities I've been to look nothing like downtown Jerusalem (where I've seen more or less concealed weapons everywhere). A more benign example would be wearing a ski mask everywhere you go and being surprised that people freak out, especially in banks or 7/11s.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I think calling the cops when seeing two armed men is a perfectly reasonable response. Their behavior is clearly suspicious, the American cities I've been to look nothing like downtown Jerusalem (where I've seen more or less concealed weapons everywhere). A more benign example would be wearing a ski mask everywhere you go and being surprised that people freak out, especially in banks or 7/11s.

I'm not disagreeing with the notion of calling 911 if you see people walking around toting rifles or shotguns, that's atypical behavior, but using the generic term "guns" can cause problems.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I'm not disagreeing with the notion of calling 911 if you see people walking around toting rifles or shotguns, that's atypical behavior, but using the generic term "guns" can cause problems.

Why? I'm not an expert on firearms, but I know the phone number of people who are. And yes, I'd dial that number. For sure I will not stop these gentlemen and enter into a discussion of the nature of their presence. And we are not talking about people who are concealing a weapon, but about two guys who have purposely paraded with their guns. They wanted to draw attention and they got it.

Apart from police officers or other people (e. g. security personnel) where it is expected that they openly carry firearms, it's atypical that people walk town centers with any sort of weapon. I don't think the situation would be substantially less alarming to me if they were carrying pistols instead.

[Shaddim]

So, guy walks into a grocery store in Portland, you're there for some reason and happen to see he has a pistol in a shoulder holster under his jacket. You then dial 911 on your cell?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

So, guy walks into a grocery store in Portland, you're there for some reason and happen to see he has a pistol in a shoulder holster under his jacket. You then dial 911 on your cell?

If he or she doesn't wear a badge or some sort of uniform, then yes, I'd probably call the cops. I think then another aspect enters: a store is private property and even if that person has a concealed carry permit, it doesn't mean he or she is allowed allowed to carry a gun inside the store.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

If he or she doesn't wear a badge or some sort of uniform, then yes, I'd probably call the cops. I think then another aspect enters: a store is private property and even if that person has a concealed carry permit, it doesn't mean he or she is allowed allowed to carry a gun inside the store.

Unless it's posted that they can't carry inside, they do have a right.

Calling 911 takes up the operator's time and the police's time, taking them away from life-threatening situations. If the person isn't causing a problem and isn't acting in a strange or threatening manner, leave them in peace. Emergency systems work best when they aren't being needlessly overloaded.

[Uncle Skeleton]

I think if people feel alarmed they should feel free to call 911. If they're overreacting, the operator is probably the best person to tell them so. Someone probably won't do it again after the operator tells them the first time. While I agree it's not a good thing to waste 911's time, it's better than being afraid to report an actual crime in time to save someone's life.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Unless it's posted that they can't carry inside, they do have a right.

As far as I know that depends on the state.

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Calling 911 takes up the operator's time and the police's time, taking them away from life-threatening situations. ... Emergency systems work best when they aren't being needlessly overloaded.

I don't think it's needless: if someone carries a gun without there being an obvious necessity to, it raises a red flag. While living in the US (PA and CA, but I've visited plenty of other states), I've never been to a place where people carrying firearms openly was common. In fact, law enforcement officers and such aside, I don't remember anyone else carrying a firearm openly. So in my experience, even in the parts of the US I've been to, it's unusual and in spirit no different from someone entering a store with a ski mask.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Calling 911 takes up the operator's time and the police's time, taking them away from life-threatening situations. If the person isn't causing a problem and isn't acting in a strange or threatening manner, leave them in peace. Emergency systems work best when they aren't being needlessly overloaded.

This is great advice until a bunch of terrorists walk into a building with fake badges on their belts and shoot a bunch of people or whatever because no-one checked up on them. Perhaps this advice only applies to white people carrying guns though?

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

I think if people feel alarmed they should feel free to call 911. If they're overreacting, the operator is probably the best person to tell them so. Someone probably won't do it again after the operator tells them the first time. While I agree it's not a good thing to waste 911's time, it's better than being afraid to report an actual crime in time to save someone's life.

Agree.

---

I wonder how many of these guys would go ask someone walking around with AR what they're doing unarmed. Because that seems to be their expectation of the citizens.

[BadKosh]

As the liberals see guns, maybe for the first time in their brainwashed little lives OF COURSE they will have emotional issues about it. That's what the indoctrination to liberal though is all about. Conditioned response. Not rational however. They feel much more safe expressing their feelings and telling us how to live than to think.

[screener]

Originally Posted by raleur 

No, it really works. I casually wear my badge on my belt when I'm toting my guns. If someone still seems agitated, my assistants will take them aside and show them my licenses.

You mean "posse".

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

That's what the indoctrination to liberal though is all about.

I laugh when people say shit like this. Do you know what the word liberal actually means?

[finboy]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I think calling the cops when seeing two armed men is a perfectly reasonable response. Their behavior is clearly suspicious, the American cities I've been to look nothing like downtown Jerusalem (where I've seen more or less concealed weapons everywhere). A more benign example would be wearing a ski mask everywhere you go and being surprised that people freak out, especially in banks or 7/11s.

What if my religion required me to wear a face covering?

I finally saw a good use for a hijab today - a young woman had her phone stuck in it to leave her hands free at Sam's Club.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

What if my religion required me to wear a face covering?

Good thing theres no religion actually stupid enough to require such a thing.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

I laugh when people say shit like this. Do you know what the word liberal actually means?

He has a point, though. With more frequency we're seeing where the fearful opinions of social engineers (from both sides of the political spectrum) are working to infringe upon the rights of individuals.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

He has a point, though.

If he does, he's done a spectacular job of burying it.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

As the liberals see guns, maybe for the first time in their brainwashed little lives OF COURSE they will have emotional issues about it. That's what the indoctrination to liberal though is all about. Conditioned response. Not rational however.

Can't be all that conditioned if they've never seen a gun in their brainwashed little life can it?

Broadly speaking, if you see someone carrying a gun, its not an unreasonable assessment to assume they are carrying it in order to shoot something since that is what guns are for. Hardly irrational to be wary in that situation.

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

They feel much more safe expressing their feelings and telling us how to live than to think.

So liberals don't feel safe telling you how to think? Probably because you'd try to shoot them if they did that.
Not sure why they'd bother trying since they know you won't listen to anyone who isn't a member of either the Republican party or the clergy (or both) when it comes to being told how to think anyway.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

I laugh when people say shit like this. Do you know what the word liberal actually means?

Yep. how are you using it? Progressive? Immature? Requiring stereotypes, and labels to relate?

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Can't be all that conditioned if they've never seen a gun in their brainwashed little life can it?

But they have seen them portrayed on TV, their version of reality.

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Broadly speaking, if you see someone carrying a gun, its not an unreasonable assessment to assume they are carrying it in order to shoot something since that is what guns are for. Hardly irrational to be wary in that situation.

No. YOU are making an assumption based on your stereotypes instead of actually finding out what is going on.

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

So liberals don't feel safe telling you how to think? Probably because you'd try to shoot them if they did that.

ANOTHER idiotic statement?

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Not sure why they'd bother trying since they know you won't listen to anyone who isn't a member of either the Republican party or the clergy (or both) when it comes to being told how to think anyway.

Again, you are making assumptions based on your faulty way you relate to others with stereotypes, soap opera plots and asumptions based on ignorance. Keep proving my point.

[Uncle Skeleton]

I'm experiencing a strange sensation. I am finding a BadKosh post totally cogent, responsive, and even... persuading? Am I going to die?

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I think then another aspect enters: a store is private property and even if that person has a concealed carry permit, it doesn't mean he or she is allowed allowed to carry a gun inside the store.

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Unless it's posted that they can't carry inside, they do have a right.

Even if it's posted on private property, "No guns allowed", that doesn't mean it's illegal to do so. Those signs do not take away ones right to carry where not expressly forbidden by law, e.g., schools, federal buildings, etc. And getting caught is not a gun violation, i.e., carrying where forbidden, like it would be if you carried in a federal building.

Like I said, concealed means concealed.

It only becomes a crime (trespassing) if someone sees your gun, asks you to leave, and you refuse. Not a gun violation of any kind. Pretty much akin to someone asking you to leave private property for ANY reason and you refusing to do so, i.e., criminal trespass.

[screener]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

I'm experiencing a strange sensation. I am finding a BadKosh post totally cogent, responsive, and even... persuading? Am I going to die?

Maybe, if you ask the gun toter what's up.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

I'm experiencing a strange sensation. I am finding a BadKosh post totally cogent, responsive, and even... persuading? Am I going to die?

Gee I hope not. Perhaps one of us has the flu? LOL

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

I'm experiencing a strange sensation. I am finding a BadKosh post totally cogent, responsive, and even... persuading? Am I going to die?

No, it's one of those planetary alignments, for the time being he's hitting on all cylinders.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

Even if it's posted on private property, "No guns allowed", that doesn't mean it's illegal to do so. Those signs do not take away ones right to carry where not expressly forbidden by law, e.g., schools, federal buildings, etc. And getting caught is not a gun violation, i.e., carrying where forbidden, like it would be if you carried in a federal building.

Like I said, concealed means concealed.

It only becomes a crime (trespassing) if someone sees your gun, asks you to leave, and you refuse. Not a gun violation of any kind. Pretty much akin to someone asking you to leave private property for ANY reason and you refusing to do so, i.e., criminal trespass.

That's correct. Here it's a misdemeanor if you carry on private property and they have "no firearms" postings. It's seldom enforced, however. It doesn't apply to armed peace officers.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

It only becomes a crime (trespassing) if someone sees your gun, asks you to leave, and you refuse. Not a gun violation of any kind. Pretty much akin to someone asking you to leave private property for ANY reason and you refusing to do so, i.e., criminal trespass.

That's really messed up: if you know in advance that the owner of the property does not want (your) guns on his property, how is that not a gun law violation? Also the idea that you assume it's ok to bring guns onto someone else property (the owner needs to expressly state his opposition) rather than having to ask for permission is very disconcerting.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

That's really messed up: if you know in advance that the owner of the property does not want (your) guns on his property, how is that not a gun law violation? Also the idea that you assume it's ok to bring guns onto someone else property (the owner needs to expressly state his opposition) rather than having to ask for permission is very disconcerting.

As always, you have to look at the location and context. You live in...?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

As always, you have to look at the location and context. You live in...?

… in Japan. (Depending on how my job applications go, I may be in Canada, England or Denmark next.) But I've lived in (among other locations) rural Pennsylvania (which is rather conservative), so I have a good idea what is and isn't unusual from an American perspective.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

I'm experiencing a strange sensation. I am finding a BadKosh post totally cogent...

Not totally, but as close as he's likely to get.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

But they have seen them portrayed on TV, their version of reality.

What was that you're about to say about making assumptions?

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

No. YOU are making an assumption based on your stereotypes instead of actually finding out what is going on.

Actually I'm saying its not ridiculous for others to make a particular assumption in a particular situation which it isn't. Guns are for shooting things or people. If you carry one, you are either intending to find something or someone to shoot, or anticipating a potential situation where you'll need to shoot someone or something.

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

ANOTHER idiotic statement?

Just because I don't usually make them doesn't mean I can't. It seems we've sort of swapped styles for a post or two.

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Again, you are making assumptions based on your faulty way you relate to others with stereotypes, soap opera plots and asumptions based on ignorance. Keep proving my point.

Normal service resumes then. Would those be stereotypes like "lefties are all conditioned to fear guns by TV" and assumptions like "relating to others with soap opera plots"?

[subego]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

If he or she doesn't wear a badge or some sort of uniform, then yes, I'd probably call the cops. I think then another aspect enters: a store is private property and even if that person has a concealed carry permit, it doesn't mean he or she is allowed allowed to carry a gun inside the store.

If I felt this threatened by the fact someone has a gun, I'd likely have a much different opinion on gun control.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by subego 

If I felt this threatened by the fact someone has a gun, I'd likely have a much different opinion on gun control.

I understand that point very well, and I assume this is also where Shaddim is going with his line argumentation. Hence, also the example of Jerusalem which I've mentioned where young people with and without uniform are seen wearing automatic weapons and pistols in the street, on trams and buses.

However, from my experience living in various countries and visiting plenty more (including states on both coasts of the US), in my experience carrying a gun for someone who isn't a cop, security personnel or affiliated to the military is also rare in the US. Perhaps in states I haven't lived in, it's more common (e. g. the South East or Texas). My host family did have some hunting rifles, but these were handled with care and as far as I can tell were not used for self-defense (bullets and rifles were always kept separate).

[subego]

Interestingly enough, my experience abroad with guns made me feel less safe.

Our cops, who deal with actual scary shit, haven't yet felt the need to be carrying around automatic weapons out in the open.

[subego]

Also interestingly enough, armed military personnel is something you never used to see in the States. Post-9/11 you see them at airports, but that's it. At least, in my 40 years, I've only seen them at airports, and it's been post-9/11.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I understand that point very well, and I assume this is also where Shaddim is going with his line argumentation. Hence, also the example of Jerusalem which I've mentioned where young people with and without uniform are seen wearing automatic weapons and pistols in the street, on trams and buses.

However, from my experience living in various countries and visiting plenty more (including states on both coasts of the US), in my experience carrying a gun for someone who isn't a cop, security personnel or affiliated to the military is also rare in the US. Perhaps in states I haven't lived in, it's more common (e. g. the South East or Texas). My host family did have some hunting rifles, but these were handled with care and as far as I can tell were not used for self-defense (bullets and rifles were always kept separate).

Not rare, if I pay close attention, I'll see ~5-7 holsters /day while out and about. I stop those people and thank them for being diligent in their civic responsibility.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by subego 

Also interestingly enough, armed military personnel is something you never used to see in the States. Post-9/11 you see them at airports, but that's it. At least, in my 40 years, I've only seen them at airports, and it's been post-9/11.

This. I very rarely see an armed soldier, usually it's cops and citizens.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Not rare, if I pay close attention, I'll see ~5-7 holsters /day while out and about. I stop those people and thank them for being diligent in their civic responsibility.

It's rare here, but handguns are illegal in the city.

I'll be honest. Whether I'd be scared if I saw a gun in someone's jacket would be 100% dependent on me profiling them.

Gangbanger: worried. Not-gangbanger: not-worried.