Open carry Texas

[Wiley]

I have made a personal choice to never blame a person for saving his own life regardless of the consequences, but this discussion has moved so far into the absurd that I think you'll have to ask someone else.

So by that, collateral damage is irrelevant.  That's certainly an opinion you're entitled to.

Wiley.

[PR3D4TOR]

You're putting words in my mouth. Let me ask you this: If the police is in a firefight with some criminals, who is responsible for the "collateral damage"?

[guncrasher]

Depends... Do they have those orange caps/muzzles? Do they look real. Are the Mexican bandits the size of children?

yes they do have orange caps and they look like water pistols.   now don't you wish he had been better prepared and bring his super soaker when he goes shooting. at the range.

and dont forget to bring. at least 2 gallons of water.  never know how many Mexican. bandits he may find.


semp

[guncrasher]

You're putting words in my mouth. Let me ask you this: If the police is in a firefight with some criminals, who is responsible for the "collateral damage"?

the police.  if police decides to just open up with no disregard. for innocent bystanders.



semp

[PR3D4TOR]

yes they do have orange caps and they look like water pistols.   now don't you wish he had been better prepared and bring his super soaker when he goes shooting. at the range.

and dont forget to bring. at least 2 gallons of water.  never know how many Mexican. bandits he may find.


semp

Very true.

[PR3D4TOR]

the police.  if police decides to just open up with no disregard. for innocent bystanders.



semp

You seem to have a total disregard for proper punctuation. Would I be justified in defending the English language with the super soaker or the M2? Or dynamite!

[DmonSlyr]

You can shoot on some public grounds in GA. We use to go outside of lakeland just east of Valdosta where there was tons of land and not many people around. It was perfectly legal to go shoot out there. Shot a whole assortment of different weapons out there.

The sad reality is that we need guns for personal protection of intruders, a militia takeover, and from domestic attacks. All of which could happen, but statistically speaking they are not likely. They realization that gun deaths and crime have dramatically decreased over the last 15 years is something you probably won't hear to  often in the media, their goal is to scare you and cause turmoil/arguements, not make you feel better.

I actually think conceal carry is okay under law and oath that you will be responsible and take the required courses to obtain such a weapon. Places that ban guns are much more likely to be prone to an attack from gangsters/terrorist who carry guns illigally, while the community cannot do anything to fight back.

Under the liberties of freedom and justice, most people who are carry guns legally cause no troubles to anyone. I'd sure feel a lot safer if some dipsh*t robbers where scared to rob my store because they knew I had a gun under the desk.
We don't need more security or watchmen in this country unless they are protecting our schools. We need people who aren't afraid to fight for freedom or to use their gun to combat robbers/terrorist, and holding guns means that freedom is a lot harder to take away.

[Wiley]

You're putting words in my mouth.

'Regardless of the consequences' is pretty hard to read any other way, but ok.  What Semp said, about the police.

You likely would have an issue with a guy breaking up a knife fight with a stick of dynamite, because it's stupid.

Using it on a crowd of looters bent on breaking into your house would likely be a more reasonable use of it.

But can you honestly say a guy walking down the street with a live, capped, ready to go stick of dynamite on his belt wouldn't at least raise an eyebrow?  The crowd of looters could happen, same as the need to defend yourself could happen.  Why is one ok and not the other?

Wiley.

[PR3D4TOR]

I'll just refrain from answering your questions until you decide to leave hypothetical unicorn-rainbow-dynamite land and get back to reality. However, your line of argumentation is typical of gun control discussions in general, because you cannot support an irrational argument with anything but hypothetical constructs since they invariably do not relate to anything that happens in real life.

[FX1]

Well i decided to go with a wheel gun instead of a 1911 or 2011. I have been itching for a new revolver for some time. Ordered a SW 986 and having my gun smith do a lazer engraving of the ranch brand and also have him Hard Chrome and custom Ivory Grips. My father brought back some ivory for on of his hunting trips to Africa before i was born. I have been waiting to use it for something special.. More than likely i will keep it iron sights but i do have a trijicon rmr that i need to mount on something. I am not a big fan of major engraving but with the ivory and hard chrome it will pop. 

Wait time is going to be 6 months to a year. After that i will take it to my holster man in llano and have him do a traditional western holster and belt. Moon clips pouches in front of course...

I will never walk down the street with this set up but it will look good in the safe and be a fun gun to shoot some poppers.

[Skyyr]

So... not as a weapon, only for target practice in designated areas.

Wiley.

You seem to enjoy trying to create strawman arguments. Your original statement was that those items could not be owned whatsoever, so regardless of how you try to paint them as being relegated to target practice, uncommon, or otherwise ineffectual, you were wrong. Period.

That being said, you can still legally use them - even in self defense - in a majority of the states. So yes, if Lil Mojeal decides to try to rob someone at gunpoint in a grocery store parking lot, and a guy who legally owns an M2 drives up, he could legally use the weapon in several states, just like he could use his own concealed carry weapon. No, not all states (as the laws for self-defense and imminent danger have different definitions), but a majority of them. My state (Tennessee) is one of those states.

But, even with that being said, using any weapon in self-defense is a strawman argument in and of itself, as the right to bear arms was never about individual self-defense from criminals, but the preservation of liberty as it stems from an armed populace.

[Wiley]

You seem to enjoy trying to create strawman arguments. Your original statement was that those items could not be owned whatsoever, so regardless of how you try to paint them, you were wrong. Period.

Ugh... what I actually meant, was 'carry'.  But yeah, that's what the post said.

It's a completely pointless discussion in any case.

Wiley.

[PR3D4TOR]

Who wants to carry a .50 cal? It weighs like 80 pounds.

[Wiley]

Who wants to carry a .50 cal? It weighs like 80 pounds.

Well, at that moment I was talking about a man portable assault rifle, not the hypothetical M2.

However, you never know when you might have to defend yourself against someone who's taken cover behind a vehicle engine or a brick wall.

Wiley.

[Skyyr]

However, you never know when you might have to defend yourself against someone who's taken cover behind a vehicle engine or a brick wall.

Wiley.

Finally, some sage advice. Looks like Wiley is coming over to the dark side!