Should Open Carry be Legal?

[Ikari]

(chuckle)

Ther's nothing wrong with my argument; it's not supid, or dumb or unreasonable. And . . . saying that someone's argument is stupid is a form of ad-hom when you can't argue it any better than that.

Your arguments, which at one point you were trying to pass off as fact, are based in bias and opinion rather than grounded reality. As such, they are certainly stupid.

And again, you should actually understand what ad-hom means.

"An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.[1] Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as a logical fallacy,[2][3][4] more precisely an informal fallacy and an irrelevance.[5]"

At least learn the language if you're going to use it.

 

[Ikari]

Open carry is a politcal argument concerning the II Amendment.

It can be a political argument, it isn't innately a political argument.

 

[mike2810]

Shouldn't people get in trouble for doing things they shouldn't be doing?

(chuckle)

Most people who get attacked are not inclined to carry guns and criminals can see that. Travon Martin wasn't carrying a gun: what if he had been? Do ya' think it would have turned out differently?

I have no idea who or what LE is. I rely on myself as well. I don't put myself into situations that might be unhealthy for me: you gun zealot "open carriers" are the type that would drive to Harlem and take a walk just so that you could show everybody "Don't mess with me; I'm carryin' a gun: love it or leave it".

Look, I don't like the atitude of gun zealots. I think that open carry is a stupid idea carried on by silly nuts who are trying to prove something. YOU don't like my opinion, but it's not going to change.

LE= law enforcement.

and you "type" people based on supporting open carry. People I know who 'open carry" do not go looking trouble. You are sadly misinformed.


Your quote.
"Most people who get attacked are not inclined to carry guns and criminals can see that". You answered one of the reasons some people carry. Buy hey, you have the right to increase your chances of being a victim. I know you won't change, neither will I.

and by the way I am not a gun zealot. Just taking responsible actions.

 

[mtlhdtodd]

What would be the point of open carry? You can defend yourself if needed with a concealed weapon, so what changes with open carry? Is it an intimidation thing?

Short answer - weather. If it's cold out I wear a jacket and I 'm concealed, but if it's warm out I'm not wearing a coat just to cover.

 

[Flippinfunky]

Short answer - weather. If it's cold out I wear a jacket and I 'm concealed, but if it's warm out I'm not wearing a coat just to cover.

Is this a joke? You can stick your gun down the back of your pants and cover it with your T shirt, no coat needed. People conceal their weapons just fine in States with 100 degree heat. Again, what's the point of open carry? Intimidation factor?

 

[jet57]

LE= law enforcement.

and you "type" people based on supporting open carry. People I know who 'open carry" do not go looking trouble. You are sadly misinformed.


Your quote.
"Most people who get attacked are not inclined to carry guns and criminals can see that". You answered one of the reasons some people carry. Buy hey, you have the right to increase your chances of being a victim. I know you won't change, neither will I.

and by the way I am not a gun zealot. Just taking responsible actions.

My opinion is my opinion on this matter. Carrying a gun isn't going to alter my chances one bit. Open carry is a political movement based on arguments over the II Amendment.

Now, LE can cary anytime they want.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

(chuckle)

"If ya can't argue effectively, the resort to ad-hom"

riiight

You mean like these?

People who walk around with guns are the ones with the insecurities. I just know stupid behavior when I see it.

Uh, noooo; you carry because that's what gun nuts do. You carry or the reasons I have stated. And, people like yourselves are the ones who are really threatening the II Amendment. Carrying is a form of paranoia:

So, no offense, but please don;t insult my intelligence with these silly arguments that try and frame me as some sort of anti II Amendment gun hater.

I just don't like stupid people who needlessly cause problems. As I've said (interesting that you ignored it); it is the gun zealots in this country who are the ones that are threatening the welfare of the II Amendment.

I don't do either of those things to show how "tuff" I am or to show that I'm a "Real 'Merican". Open carry is nothing more than a political statement only becasue you can. It's silly and embarrasses this country.

So, tha only means that you pack heat around for the machismo effect; that's what I thought. It is peopple like yourself who are endangering the II Amendment.

Insecurities are only justified by the paranoid.

 

[jet57]

You mean like these?

​

Yes; those are my opinions: I'm not writing a paper. In my mind it is stupid and dangerous to be walking around with a gun. I keep citing George Zimmerman as a factual example but you guys keep ignoring that "inconvenient truth" . . .

It defys reason that some American citizens feel the need in 2012 A.D. to walk around with guns on their hips. It's all just a silly political game.

 

[Ikari]

You mean like these?

​

Well those are actual ad-homs as they purposefully attack the individual. Jet's opinion on ad-homs are apparently different than the actual definition.

 

[mtlhdtodd]

Well those are actual ad-homs as they purposefully attack the individual. Jet's opinion on ad-homs are apparently different than the actual definition.

The term hypocrite seems to fit him quite well.

 

[jet57]

The term hypocrite seems to fit him quite well.

Says the one who can't frame a decent argument and compete.

 

[jet57]

The term hypocrite seems to fit him quite well.

Well those are actual ad-homs as they purposefully attack the individual. Jet's opinion on ad-homs are apparently different than the actual definition.

When they turn the argument into their opponent; they have lost the argument.

Please stay on topic.

Now, frame an argument that shows that my opinion on this matter is wrong and that George Zimmerman is not a classic example of a fool with a gun.

 

[mike2810]

My opinion is my opinion on this matter. Carrying a gun isn't going to alter my chances one bit. Open carry is a political movement based on arguments over the II Amendment.

Now, LE can cary anytime they want.

Yep. its is strickly your opinion. (most likely based on misinformation or lack of knowledge. but thats ok. you have that right, as I have the right to mine).

 

[cpgrad08]

There is a deterrent factor to criminals when Open Carrying.

 

[ttwtt78640]

There is a deterrent factor to criminals when Open Carrying.

That depends. Is it better for the thug to see your gun, and simply move on to their next victim, or that they do not see your gun, and you are their last victim?

 

[joko104]

Open carry forces people to be more civilized and is a huge deterent to bullies.

 

[cpgrad08]

That depends. Is it better for the thug to see your gun, and simply move on to their next victim, or that they do not see your gun, and you are their last victim?

Just because if I'm CCing (which I do too along with OC) doesn't mean I will be their last victim or mean I will come out alive in such in encounter.

 

[jet57]

There is a deterrent factor to criminals when Open Carrying.

That deterent doesn't fly in the case of nuts with guns who pose a much greater safety risk to the public around them. That's my point and Zimmerman is the golden example.

 

[cpgrad08]

That deterent doesn't fly in the case of nuts with guns who pose a much greater safety risk to the public around them. That's my point and Zimmerman is the golden example.

Is it a tragedy when "nuts" with guns do terrible things with said gun. Yes, but In the grand picture of things they make up a very very small fraction of the gun owners in the U.S.

 

[Flippinfunky]

Open carry forces people to be more civilized and is a huge deterent to bullies.

Gee finally someone answered my question...so it is about the intimidation factor. What I dont understand is why cant men, who wish to resolve things with violence, just knuckle up? You know....a good, ole' fashioned fist fight

 

[jet57]

Is it a tragedy when "nuts" with guns do terrible things with said gun. Yes, but In the grand picture of things they make up a very very small fraction of the gun owners in the U.S.

That can be argued, I will agree. The case of nuts with guns however extends to said "marksmen" shooting at fleeing suspects; or "aiding the cops" etc. It's like releasing U32 into the general public, saying that the nuts who might do something bad with it are far and few between . . . The open threat to the community at large far outweighs this "need" for some people to engage in open political action because they're paranoid about the damage that they are doing to the II Amendment.

Sorry, but it's all an act that serves no purpose whatsoever.

 

[notquiteright]

The term is, "an armed society is a polite society". It is right up there with 'lightening never strikes twice' and 'I'll pull out in time' as a warm fuzzy that isn't true but we would like to believe.

It isn't a pistol on the hip that makes the difference but rather a loose nut on the trigger.

More to the point is the neighborhood the daring open carry hero is walking. Those brave men in Virginia who open carry for a lunchtime meeting at a yuppie eatery are not risking much nor deterring much.

But walk all by your lonesome in the neighborhood where Newt wants to recruit child janitors and the polite will soon be worn plum smooth. :shock:

I see open carry deterrence the same way I see locks- they keep honest folks honest. But unless you keep hyper vigilante situational awareness, and believe me there is a reason a light infantry patrol rotates the pointman, you most likely won't see/hear it coming.

Those you REALLY want to deter will resort to stalk and ambush in a pack. Bad guys didn't ride alone in the 'Wild West', they rode as a gang.

But like lightening never striking twice, the old saw about a polite society is a comfort to many until the skies get really bad... eace

 

[TurtleDude]

That deterent doesn't fly in the case of nuts with guns who pose a much greater safety risk to the public around them. That's my point and Zimmerman is the golden example.

you are just being a contrarian now. Arguing for the sake of arguing. Zimmerman has no relevance to open carry

 

[mike2810]

Gee finally someone answered my question...so it is about the intimidation factor. What I dont understand is why cant men, who wish to resolve things with violence, just knuckle up? You know....a good, ole' fashioned fist fight

Because the other guy (thief/robber/etc) won'/don't play by those rules. If someone is going to do harm to you, you really think they will check to make sure the fight will be fair? I don't think we are talking about two neighbors getting into a disagreement. Open carry deters those who want to make you a target for mugging/robbery/etc.

 

[Ikari]

When they turn the argument into their opponent; they have lost the argument.

Please stay on topic.

Now, frame an argument that shows that my opinion on this matter is wrong and that George Zimmerman is not a classic example of a fool with a gun.

I already told you why your argument was stupid is in post 246. The basis of your argument is bias, supposition, and faulty logic.