We can agree that 100% of people posting on this forum are pro-gun and pro-2nd Amendment.
However, the majority on this thread, including me, think that:
1. This was a really dumb stunt.
2. This type of behavior, while currently legal, will likely become illegal and further encroach our right.
With great rights come great responsibilities. Exercise them irresponsibly and you shall soon lose them. This is a prime example of that.
I refer back to the yelling "fire" analogy, or "hi, jack," analogy. Both are appropriate here. They are legal and illegal depending on their context.
Yell "hi, jack," to a guy named Jack on the public street in downtown Cleveland, nobody cares. Change the context, put yourself in ANY location of an airport or on an airplane, and you'll be at least detained and there's a good chance you'll face federal charges. Same thing with yelling fire, there is a time and a place where it is clearly illegal.
Rights to carry are hard-fought and won, very narrowly. Idiots like this can get them taken away by very negative actions like this. It is quite telling that most pro-gun people on this forum are against this behavior. I've seen this discussion on a number of gun boards over the years when people open carry military guns at rallys and pull stunts like this at the airport. It is very unpopular among pro-gun crowd, due to the terrible public press. For the sake of pure argument, let's say that 2 in 10 (20%) of pro gun people are supportive. You can bet zero of the fence sitters (the crowd we really need) are supportive, and it gives the antis a lot of ammunition against us "loons."
Wherein we learn that some people think it's fine if people with shiny bits of metal on their chests carry automatic weapons in the Airport but a semi-automatic sporting rifle is cause for widespread panic.
I'm not a firefighter either, that doesn't mean I can't have a fire extinguisher in my kitchen, one in my car and an industrial sized one in my garage. What else ya got?
You're preaching to the choir, but you're not making any sense. We are all on the same pro-gun team, and most of us would make these arguments for normal gun ownership behavior. Except it's not normal to be open carrying any loaded rifles in such a manner in a somewhat controlled environment.
You cannot deny it's a controlled environment. You are under strict watchful eye the moment you get onto airport property from cameras, police, TSA, and sometimes military. Suspect cars can and do get searched or towed, you can't park in certain drop off/pick up points, and yada yada yada.
This isn't a unique or period difference in the difference of normal versus abnormal behavior. In peacetime, it would have never been normal to act this way - carrying a loaded military style weapon into a psuedo-secured entry point. Not in the 1800s, not in the 1900s, and not in the 2000s. It can rightly be viewed as a step toward hostilities.
I doubt you can intellectually honestly say that if you were to take your kid to school, and there was a man hovering around the school, let's say just beyond the "gun free" area, watching the kids with a pair of binoculars (totally legal) with an AR15 or a scoped hunting rifle slung on his back (assume that is legal where you live) - that you wouldn't feel apprehensive and alert authorities? Again, context. I would assume this guy is up to deviant plans.
I could come up with a million examples of normal behavior but abnormal or dangerous appearing in context.
I'll add that this is also viewed in military terms as "probing for weaknesses." By design, targets are probed for weaknesses, response to actions, etc. Carrying an open AR15 into such an area to view the response might be one of a million examples of this activity. And one more reason courts would immediately make it illegal.
And this again sets us back. Not a single Federal judge is going to say that it's okay to carry an AR15 loaded and in the open into an airport check in area. Not one.
