I find it funny

SC406 said:
I could care less about the legal aspect, it has nothing to do with why I'm trying to say. I, as well as everyone else, should be able to enjoy the same rights no matter our status, or where we are within this country.
Click to expand...
Considering that the circumstance about which you are complaining is the result of laws, how can you possibly say you don't care about the legal aspect? That's the only aspect there is. Absent the "legal aspect," you could carry anything, anywhere.
 
Thanks 44 AMP, the way you explained it certainly makes sense to me.

Considering that the circumstance about which you are complaining is the result of laws, how can you possibly say you don't care about the legal aspect? That's the only aspect there is. Absent the "legal aspect," you could carry anything, anywhere.
Click to expand...

Well, that legal aspect has to come from somewhere, i.e. a lawmaker's morals.

Edit: Let me clarify in that I don't care what Massachusetts law says, just because something is a law doesn't mean it's morally right. I care about the moral aspect of this whole deal. I don't think it's morally right to allow someone the right to defend themselves based on location or status.
 
Last edited:
How is it that a bunch of guys can take all these scary weapons into MA on the weekend, but all of a sudden these SAME GUYS would be criminals on Monday for taking any weapon over?
Click to expand...


Probably the same way I can open carry a firearm in the woods hunting and never get a second look, but come to this very gun forum and claim I open carry and I get chastised by fellow gun owners.

Stupid is what stupid does.
 
The dilemma you touch on is created by the exact tyranny the 2nd Amendment is meant to prevent.

I get perplexed when I read an article with a statement such as ..."both the mens' firearms were owned legally." Of course they were owned legally. Haven't you read the 2nd Amendment? The right of the people to keep AND bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
 
The urban populations in MA and NY, for instance, support gun control and they drive the laws of the entire states. It's that simple, sadly.
Click to expand...

That is the single worst problem with a democracy and why the Founders gave us a Constitutional Republic.
 
When you put the uniform on you become one of the "police or military only" elite that the anti-RKBA is always quacking about as being the only ones who should be permitted to have firearms.
When you take the uniform off, you become a knuckle dragging bitter-clinger
, etc., etc., with an IQ of 75.
 
Don't forget, you get to be a deranged vet with Post-Traumatic Stress, the ticking time bomb beloved by journalists. While you were in the service, of course, you were an uneducated hick with no marketable skills, a victim of trickle-down economic policies that forced you to join the military in order to eat. In other words, once a knuckle-dragging inbred mouth-breather, always a knuckle-dragging inbred mouth-breather, in or out of the service.

The only reason the gun haters use the only-military-should-have-them is to convince the public to get them out of private hands. They just don't respect the military at all.
 
Last edited:
I'd say that just about sums it up Kilimanjaro, as unfortunate as it is. That's okay though, it doesn't bother me. I don't need any naysayer's approval to be proud of my decisions.
 
Before I retired as a Federal Agent, I carried a duty weapon inside sterile areas of airports and on airplanes.

Now, when I fly, I have to check my armament inside my luggage like anyone else.

When I do a road trip, I have to check what states have reciprocity with my state (Florida) so I won't knowingly violate any laws. I usually avoid states such as NJ, NY, MA, etc.

The moral of the story is that we have to obey the applicable laws as they apply to us at a particular point in time and at a particular geographical location.
 
45Gunner said:
Before I retired as a Federal Agent, I carried a duty weapon inside sterile areas of airports and on airplanes.

...

When I do a road trip, I have to check what states have reciprocity with my state (Florida) so I won't knowingly violate any laws. I usually avoid states such as NJ, NY, MA, etc.
Click to expand...
Aren't you covered by the LEOSA, irrespective of permits and reciprocity? You should be if you're a retired federal LEO.
 
The moral of the story is that we have to obey the applicable laws as they apply to us at a particular point in time and at a particular geographical location.
Click to expand...
I respect your civility and view but also I am reminded that not all laws are necessarily just. George Washington and many others chose to disregard many "applicable" laws. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote about this as well in his letters from Birmingham jail. As we speak there are one billion Chinese who are banned from using the open internet. At some point along the spectrum of restriction of personal liberty, "reasonable" government regulation just becomes tyranny does it not?
 
The moral of the story is that we have to obey the applicable laws as they apply to us at a particular point in time and at a particular geographical location.
Click to expand...
I respect your civility and view but also I am reminded that not all laws are necessarily just. George Washington and many others chose to disregard many "applicable" laws. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote about this as well in his letters from Birmingham jail. As we speak there are one billion Chinese who are banned from using the open internet. At some point along the spectrum of restriction of personal liberty, "reasonable" government regulation just becomes tyranny does it not?
Click to expand...


Both points are obviously correct, the next step is voting in figures who represent your values and personal liberty.

The process is slow with uncertain outcomes and you'll never get 100% of what you want, but neither will the other side.
While frustrating, its also a benefit because it provides stability and slows unsettling change.

Whats that they say? "A fair deal is one where both walk away feeling screwed"

We American's still have the best deal on the planet.
 
rickyrick, you were concise and so right to the point:

Gun laws are not about controlling criminals. Criminal have already crossed that line. Laws are for controlling the controllable.
Click to expand...

OBTW, since I live on the edge of Seattle and have a somewhat accurate idea of the terrain down near the Columbia, I am certain that you cannot be in "Mesquite Jungle Desert, West Texas".. How recently did you move to WA State?

I've been here since I was in high school and Nixon was POTUS then. I've learned to love this state and realized that the gun laws were not too bad. And then that damn initiative was passed and the state gets into every single gun sale. But, looking on the bright side, we got suppressors and short-barreled rifles legalized in just the last few years.

Bart Noir
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top