Jump to content

Ferguson and the Oathkeepers prove absolutely the need for open carry


Bud

Recommended Posts

When it becomes obvious, time and time again, that the police or even the National Guard will not be able to protect you, then it becomes time to band together with others to protect your property.

 

The best way to do that is an open and legal show of force.

 

The purest example for the need for the 2nd Amendment is ongoing in Ferguson where Missouri law allows open carry for concealed carry permit holders.

 

I now believe, because of the situation that continues to expand, that it is urgent that Illinois pass an open carry law

 

 

 

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/12/01/238B492900000578-2855736-John_Karriman_a_volunteer_from_vigilante_organization_Oath_Keepe-19_1417428002173.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you can't stand on the sidewalk in front of your home or business or walk across the street to your neighbors.

Wait, what if I got on my roof in Chicago with a legal rifle or shotgun, kinda like the picture Bud posted? Would that help or hinder our cause? Nevermind, it's kind of cold out and I'm kind of scared of heights in my old age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here we go again :frantics:

 

 

if you had been here just a tad longer, you would realize I have always been the one to dismiss the notion of open carry. I never believed that is should be a priority.

 

But, in your own smarmy way, you leaped up and slammed your foot deep into your mouth just to act like you know better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question is, Dont these places have insurance? For me im not risking my life for property. how much property will you loose in court if you actually shoot someone? Your home maybe but a business I just dont know.

 

As to Open carry, in this case it serves its true purpose, intimidation. People see the guns and go loot elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question is, Dont these places have insurance? For me im not risking my life for property. how much property will you loose in court if you actually shoot someone? Your home maybe but a business I just dont know.

 

As to Open carry, in this case it serves its true purpose, intimidation. People see the guns and go loot elsewhere.

 

I've heard and read that intentional acts of arson are not covered by insurance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question is, Dont these places have insurance? For me im not risking my life for property.

How many insurance policies provide protection during times of civil unrest or warfare? Does yours?

 

how much property will you loose in court if you actually shoot someone? Your home maybe but a business I just dont know.

Like all other cases it will likely be based on if the use of force was justified or not. A reply question - if sacrificing summer of your property and life's work is acceptable sometimes, what's the limit, and under what circumstances? If your primary concern is potential litigation rather than protecting you and yours, send your CHL back to the using authority and sell your guns. ;)

 

As to Open carry, in this case it serves its true purpose, intimidation. People see the guns and go loot elsewhere.

Intimidation implies a potentially unlawful use or coercion of otherwise law abiding individuals. Others might prefer the term "deterrent", especially as it relates to criminals contemplating the commission of one or more forcible felonies in or near your location and involving your property.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard and read that intentional acts of arson are not covered by insurance.

If the arson is committed for the purpose of insurance fraud your statement is absolutely correct... however if a person intentionally sets my property on fire without my permission, knowledge or criminal conspiracy involved then the answer is no, insurance will pay for someone else starting fires. As long as it's not during a period of what could be deemed civil unrest, or warfare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

As to Open carry, in this case it serves its true purpose, intimidation. People see the guns and go loot elsewhere.

Intimidation implies a potentially unlawful use or coercion of otherwise law abiding individuals. Others might prefer the term "deterrent", especially as it relates to criminals contemplating the commission of one or more forcible felonies in or near your location and involving your property.

 

I don't believe it is an attempt to intimidate but rather "I have no intention of allowing you to victimize me so go elsewhere"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your chances of being litigated, or going to jail, if you sat on your front porch everyday with a AR and a ski mask, then one day shot somebody would be pretty high. Comparing that to me going to walmart with a CCW and shooting somebody who is robbing me are beyond even close to being similar.

 

I have to believe that arson is covered under my insurance unless im the one that set the fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your chances of being litigated, or going to jail, if you sat on your front porch everyday with a AR and a ski mask, then one day shot somebody would be pretty high. Comparing that to me going to walmart with a CCW and shooting somebody who is robbing me are beyond even close to being similar.

 

I have to believe that arson is covered under my insurance unless im the one that set the fire.

 

you better check on that, unless you have a specific rider I'll be a dollar to a horse turd it doesn't

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always supported open carry, so glad you're on board too Bud!

My approach to Ferguson was mostly "give the authorities the chance to get it under control", I won't be making that mistake again. The next time something like this goes down, I will be on a rooftop.

 

A note about insurance, just because you have insurance doesn't mean you're not losing money, you may not be out of business, but I guarantee it's a setback, I bet it'll still end up costing you thousands even if insurance pays out, and that's a big IF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Here we go again :frantics:

 

 

if you had been here just a tad longer, you would realize I have always been the one to dismiss the notion of open carry. I never believed that is should be a priority.

 

But, in your own smarmy way, you leaped up and slammed your foot deep into your mouth just to act like you know better.

 

 

smarmy adjective \ˈsmär-mē\

 

: behaving in a way that seems polite, kind, or pleasing but is not genuine or believable

 

smarm·i·ersmarm·i·est

 

Full Definition of SMARMY

 

: revealing or marked by a smug, ingratiating, or false earnestness <a tone of smarmy self-satisfaction New Yorker>

 

I wasn't trying to be polite or ingenuine or "SMARMY"

 

I called it as I saw it

 

Whether you think O.C. is low priority or high priority is moot

This subject has been discussed Ad nauseam here

 

And if you want to be insulting

I could say your just being a pot stirring TROLL

by bringing the O.C. subject up again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question is, Dont these places have insurance? For me im not risking my life for property. how much property will you loose in court if you actually shoot someone? Your home maybe but a business I just dont know.

 

As to Open carry, in this case it serves its true purpose, intimidation. People see the guns and go loot elsewhere.

Most if not all insurance will not cover riot and/or civil unrest damage so if a business is burned down the owner will lose everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

As to Open carry, in this case it serves its true purpose, intimidation. People see the guns and go loot elsewhere.

Intimidation implies a potentially unlawful use or coercion of otherwise law abiding individuals. Others might prefer the term "deterrent", especially as it relates to criminals contemplating the commission of one or more forcible felonies in or near your location and involving your property.

 

This means that cops are guilty of intimidation for merely openly carrying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that we are still in Illinois, I have to ask...

 

Would passage of Open Carry legislation give the antis political/legal cover to again outlaw concealed carry?

 

If so, I'm not anxious to make that swap. If not, I'm supportive of it even though I know there'd probably be some idiots out there making all gun owners look bad and hurting our cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...