US Open Carry Laws and Gun Discussion

[Tracker]

The scariest thing is that under the law in almost all states, all a killer has to state is that s/he felt threatened  without any real objective proof. Thus, any paranoid gun-carrier can be "justified" in killing. In Canada, the law states that any such incident has to be credible to a reasonable person. A few years ago in California, two Chinese students went out in costume on Halloween. When they rang the doorbell of a house, the householder fired several shots through the door, killing both. It was ruled a justifiable shooting.

[johnzo]

I was talking in the original thread about how hard it can be to get jury convictions in the USA when cops or civilians shoot minorities.

The Walter Scott trial just ended in a hung-jury mistrial -- one or more jurors refused to convict the killer.  This, despite the fact that a bystander video shows an unarmed Scott being shot in the back repeatedly by the cop.  The cop drops his taser next to the fallen man and says in his paperwork that Scott took the taser from him in a struggle.

Only good news: the prosecution says they're going to retry the case.

Film the police, man.

[Taynted_Fayth]

22 hours ago, Old Bomber Fan said:

I trust 17 to 85's post was in jest at least I certainly hope so. As a snowbird who travels south annually it has become very frightening reading the newspapers and watching TV about the gun violence in the US. The comments about increased gun sales after 9/11 are frightening and true.

In Arizona they have a open carry policy and when you are in wal mart and see someone walk in with an AK15 it makes you wonder.

The Americans have forgotten that the second amendment was written in the wild west days in order for someone to protect themselves when there was little law and order save perhaps a sheriff or two.

In todays society they have police forces that are well armed and manned. Just think of this scenario; a guy walks into Walmart with an AK15 and opens fire. All those who have weapons pull theirs and open fire as well. That results in a lot of bullets flying everywhere. Wonder what the damage would be? While I understand their desire and fear, perhaps more vigilance and support of the police would be a better alternative. I can only guess that the death or injured toll would be significantly higher in the scenario I presented than if the public let the police look after it.

On the other hand on Black Friday I attended the shopping frenzy for the first time and while it was very busy it was cordial and attended by many police armed and in kevlor vests. No incidents so there are some rational people here. Then again with that said twice they have voted to not inforce the use of cell phones while driving. Guess you win some and lose some. The wild west mentality remains however and that is frightening.

an AK15? thats a little over the top wasnt the open carry law was meant for handguns and need to be holstered

[bigg jay]

2 hours ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

an AK15? thats a little over the top wasnt the open carry law was meant for handguns and need to be holstered

Google AR15 open carry and you'll get your answer.

[Mark F]

And the police were able to determine that there is no criminal responsiblity after at most a one day investigation of this shooting.

America really is nuts.

 

Edited December 6, 2016 by Mark F

[The Unknown Poster]

Police shootings are complicated in a different way then the average idiot walking around with a holster and an attitude.  When a cop shoots someone, the feeling is to look for any reason to indicate it might have been justified rather then looking at it objectively.  And again, I think some of it comes down to the attitude of the officer.

In this case, the officer was at a point in his emotions that he just wasnt chasing after this guy.  Probably, in the moment his brain considered drawing his weapon, he equated the situation as threatening because the suspect was within physical distance (possibly in a tussle).  But in that time it took for everything to happen, the suspect was far away and obviously, the shooting could not be justified.

There was another case recently where several officers fired on a man in a vehicle.  His wife and everyone swore he had no weapon but he clearly did.  But again, at what point do we just execute people, even if they are carrying a gun.  There is a "just shoot em" mentality.  But if you're the police and you live in a time where everyone has a gun and everyone feels righteous about using it...how itchy does your trigger finger become?

There is no common sense rationale that equates the second amendment with carrying assault rifles.  There just isn't.  In fact, I think its a stretch to make the second amendment even relevant today at all. 

[basslicker]

Don't mess with cops and you won't get shot, most of the time.  The majority of the shootings that the loonies at Black Lives Matter cry about are justified police action. 

I wish Canada had open carry laws and allowed us to defend ourselves.  What a joke society we live in that we cannot protect our family's lives and well-being.  Armed intruder threatening your wife and kids?  Better call the cops so they can arrive in time to mop up the blood. 

 

People don't like praying or guns, but when trouble comes you'll be praying to Him to send a man with a gun to help you.  I'd rather be that man protecting my family.

Edited December 7, 2016 by basslicker

[basslicker]

On ‎2016‎-‎12‎-‎03 at 2:07 PM, SpeedFlex27 said:

Especially in the US where some States have legalized the carrying of guns & self defense laws. Back here, if there's someone acting irrationally aggressive towards you on the road then stay in your car, use your smart phone & call 911. Don't challenge them. If the other driver speeds off then get the license plate before calling police.

And thank you Pierre Trudeau for making Canada into the country where we're supposed to run away from all danger.

Anyone remember the badasses in Winnipeg who chased down an armed suspect who had just shot a guy at a bus stop on Main street?  Now those are brave people.

Edited December 7, 2016 by basslicker

[The Unknown Poster]

1 minute ago, basslicker said:

Don't mess with cops and you won't get shot, most of the time.  The majority of the shootings that the loonies at Black Lives Matter cry about are justified police action. 

I wish Canada had open carry laws and allowed us to defend ourselves.  What a joke society we live in that we cannot protect our family's lives and well-being.  Armed intruder threatening your wife and kids?  Better call the cops so they can arrive in time to mop up the blood. 

 

People don't like praying or guns, but when trouble comes you'll be praying to Him to send a man with a gun to help you.  I'd rather be that man protecting my family.

This is such a wrong mentality.  Firstly, do you believe every crime deserves the death penalty?  Because the "dont mess with cops, dont get shot" is silly.  Is running from a cop, "messing with"?  Are you really saying evading police is a death penalty case?  Let's not even factor in mental illness that can cause people to react aggressively or that as humans, people can react poorly in the moment.  Not deserving of death.

How often do armed intruder's threaten your kids?  If we armed everyone to help them in the rare event they were confronted by an armed intruder, we'd need more crime scene clean up crews to mop up the blood from the times those guns are used to shoot others, not armed intruders. 

The paranoia that people are out to get us so we need to arm ourselves is silly.  The fact a time might come when you call 911 and need the police to help you does not mean we should all be armed so we dont need the police at all.  That's not even an argument worthy of debate.  If this is the sum total of your reasoning to have guns, then the anti-gun people have already won.

No one needs guns.

[The Unknown Poster]

4 minutes ago, basslicker said:

And thank you Pierre Trudeau for making Canada into the country where we're supposed to run away from all danger.

Anyone remember the badasses in Winnipeg who chased down an armed suspect who had just shot a guy at a bus stop on Main street?  Now those are brave people.

How many guns did those basasses have?  How many times did they shoot the suspect?

[SpeedFlex27]

...

Edited December 8, 2016 by SpeedFlex27

[Goalie]

Guns aren't really the problem.  I own guns. My friends own guns. I don't carry any around with me EVER. 

The people are the problem. That gun doesn't fire itself... and it certainly doesnt load itself...it's the idiot pulling the trigger that's the real problem and in America.... well, that idiot just so happens to be most of the citizens of the country. 

#merica 

Edited December 8, 2016 by Goalie

[The Unknown Poster]

12 hours ago, Goalie said:

Guns aren't really the problem.  I own guns. My friends own guns. I don't carry any around with me EVER. 

The people are the problem. That gun doesn't fire itself... and it certainly doesnt load itself...it's the idiot pulling the trigger that's the real problem and in America.... well, that idiot just so happens to be most of the citizens of the country. 

#merica 

Yes and no.  I think this argument is totally reasonable when dealing with reasonable people.  Lots of Canadians have guns.  But the culture is different.  You're not carrying your hunting rifle around with you for "protection" because you think everyone is out to get you.  You dont have a gun in your nightstand, glove box, ankle holster, work desk, closet, TV tray etc.

I think part of the issue with the gun lobby is that it doesnt just create a sense of entitlement to have a gun for safe and reasonable purposes.  It creates a culture of entitlement to carry and use whenever THEY deem appropriate.  And the laws like stand your ground only help to embolden the idiots, especially with interpretations like "if you feel threatened you have the right to shoot to kill".  That's far too subjective.

You can get into a fist fight here and kill the other guy with no intentions of doing so (only takes one punch) and get charged.  In the US, someone throws a punch and you can shoot him to death and be justified.  It's ridiculous.

[Goalie]

America is 1 complicated large country. What comes with large populated countries is problems, Yeah, it seems most are self induced problems like this ridiculous stand your ground stuff or whatever similar laws they have to it. 

 

Honestly, anyone remember that Simpsons episode? Chief Wiggum looking through the town charter for some odd reason, perhaps it was the mono rail episode (think it was) but.. he's looking through it and comes across something and it says something similar to like the chief of police is owed some sort of pie or something on the last friday of the month? 

 

I've never actually read the second amendment because I'M CANADIAN and don't really care.... but i'd suspect if you actually read it, a lot of the stuff said there, fine print etc, well, it doesn't really apply to 2016... It applies more to the time it was well, basically when America was born, which was many many hundreds of years ago now... different time and culture back then, but that's America for you really... 

 

What can you do really, you can't do much... They like to pretend they follow their little declaration of indepedence and these rights that they have but in reality, none of them really make much sense to the year 2016. 

 

I watch CNN and yeah CANADA has it's share of problems also, but damn, every time i watch CNN, it just makes me a little more proud to be Canadian. 

 

Edited December 8, 2016 by Goalie

[The Unknown Poster]

The second amendment reads:

“A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

The problem is interpreting what the founding fathers meant.  Personally I think the easiest gimme is that they NEVER envisioned assault rifles and things of that nature so to me, that should be the easiest thing in the world to agree that it cant possibly apply.  And Im not even sure the gun nuts care about assault rifles.  They see weapons like that as the buffer between the anti-gun people and the "reasonable" guns.  If you take the machines guns, my revolver is next.  That sort of thing.

The issue is, what is meant by "the people" and what is meant by "militia".

Someone like me thinks its clear, that when you take the time they lived in, they meant the right of the people to form a militia to defend the state, essentially a reserve army.  Back then, you did have to fight.  Now, you dont.  There is no need for the average person to form a militia to defend the country.

The argument to that is that Alexander Hamilton stated:

“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed…” and adding later, “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government.”

One can read that pretty clearly.  He felt the thing preventing any government from just seizing power was the threat of the people to overthrow that government and start over.  And without the ability to physically defeat the government or those that might attempt a coup, then the people lost a key position of power.  Fair enough.  And within the TIME that it was stated, it made some sense. 

And there is the argument that the founding fathers intended to instill in the people the absolute right to defend themselves (not just from a bad government), that this ability to defend yourself was a right.  Gun nuts will claim only by having guns can you have this right but I think it can be arfued you always have the right to defend yourself, but the constitution does not specify that its with bigger, badder, more lethal weaponry of whatever time frame you live in.

If Mexico attacked Texas, it would not be the expectation of the average citizen to go to war.  The US has a military for that purpose.  And the average citizen, even gun activists arent generally armed or trained well enough to fight the state-trained and state-armed military of another nation.  That notion simply doesn't apply.  Gun people claim its sacred and should not be touched.  But its not sacred because it has been amended, not often, but it has.

The first ten amendments were included as the Bill of Fights upon ratification in 1791.  It has been amended 17 times since then, 12 times since 1913 and as recently as 1992.  The constitution has been amended due to change in culture and thought over the years, essentially, due to the time frame we live in.

Blacks were given the vote.  Women were given the vote.  Presidents were limited to two terms.  Voting age was reduced.  etc.  But Guns are sacred??  I find that to be an unreasonable position.

Personally, I think the second amendment is pretty clear.  But others see it differently.  But the one obious thing is, people dont agree.  So it should be updated.  And thats the problem. 

[Jacquie]

On 2016-12-06 at 8:24 AM, Mark F said:

And the police were able to determine that there is no criminal responsiblity after at most a one day investigation of this shooting.

America really is nuts.

 

They never said he was not criminal responsible. They said they were going to keep investigating and they've now charged him with manslaughter.

[Mark F]

14 hours ago, Jacquie said:

They never said he was not criminal responsible. They said they were going to keep investigating and they've now charged him with manslaughter.

ok.... read or heard something to the contrary.

manslaughter, plea bargain down to careless use of a firearm, get a fine?

maybe would have been better to charge with murder, bargain down to manslaughter?

seems weak to me.

 

[Mark F]

22 hours ago, Goalie said:

I watch CNN and yeah CANADA has it's share of problems also, but damn, every time i watch CNN, it just makes me a little more proud to be Canadian. 

The Americans have literally millions of men who were trained as soldiers, went to war, return to the USA, and other than platitudes at football games, don't get much help. To boot, the economy is shitty for many, and for many there are no decent jobs.

Bad brew.

[The Unknown Poster]

9 minutes ago, Mark F said:

ok.... read or heard something to the contrary.

manslaughter, plea bargain down to careless use of a firearm, get a fine?

maybe would have been better to charge with murder, bargain down to manslaughter?

seems weak to me.

 

Well, he should be charged with the appropriate offense.  DA's and Crowns here use charges for bargaining too often.  Police do too, charging people when they know its going to get tossed just to cause grief.  But that's another issue.

There was a lot of news coming out about this early on.  For example, I had heard that a witness claimed the shooter stood over the victim and emptied his clip into him.  That apparently is false.  There was outrage because the shooter was initially released.  We dont know all the details but let's assume the police and DA have the facts and see it correctly.

[Goalie]

The problem in todays world, is we all have social media like twitter and facebook where you get the people on there who spread BS about things, like this mcknight shooting, i was pretty convinced when i read that a witness said gasser stood over him and told him " i told you not to eff with me". Turns out it was BS but so many people on twitter were saying it and convinced it was true, it was hard not to believe, turns out that was a load of crap and just people making stuff up, I don't want to get in to the race issues at all but... it was made up by a person of color. Was i surprised when i discovered that? Not really unfortunately.  Because unfortunately on social media, when you have these shootings and the victim is a person of color, unfortunately what happens is people make it about the color of the skin. It's not about that even, it's about guns, it's about standing your ground, it's about just stupidity really. Joe McKnight is dead because people are allowed to carry guns and shoot people multiple times for no real reason, because they feel "THREATENED". yup, and i'm not saying McKnight is completely innocent in all this, he's more than likely not, if he just ignored it all and drove away or whatever, didn't get out of his car, it wouldn't have happened. He'd be alive still. But.. social media, the whole point here, it's a problem, You have people on there from New York or far away from where the incident happened acting like they were there in New Orleans or whatever little hick town it happened in and pretty much spewing BS and a whole bunch of hate about something that really, they had no clue about. 

[basslicker]

On ‎2016‎-‎12‎-‎07 at 9:07 AM, The Unknown Poster said:

How many guns did those basasses have?  How many times did they shoot the suspect?

They were unarmed, and were simply chasing down a criminal because they felt it was the right thing to do.  I believe they tackled the guy, I believe, could be wrong.

[The Unknown Poster]

2 minutes ago, basslicker said:

They were unarmed, and were simply chasing down a criminal because they felt it was the right thing to do.  I believe they tackled the guy, I believe, could be wrong.

So the public doesn't need to be armed to defend themselves and others.  That's a great point.

[basslicker]

On ‎2016‎-‎12‎-‎07 at 9:06 AM, The Unknown Poster said:

This is such a wrong mentality.  Firstly, do you believe every crime deserves the death penalty?  Because the "dont mess with cops, dont get shot" is silly.  Is running from a cop, "messing with"?  Are you really saying evading police is a death penalty case?  Let's not even factor in mental illness that can cause people to react aggressively or that as humans, people can react poorly in the moment.  Not deserving of death.

How often do armed intruder's threaten your kids?  If we armed everyone to help them in the rare event they were confronted by an armed intruder, we'd need more crime scene clean up crews to mop up the blood from the times those guns are used to shoot others, not armed intruders. 

The paranoia that people are out to get us so we need to arm ourselves is silly.  The fact a time might come when you call 911 and need the police to help you does not mean we should all be armed so we dont need the police at all.  That's not even an argument worthy of debate.  If this is the sum total of your reasoning to have guns, then the anti-gun people have already won.

No one needs guns.

So by your logic, the rarity of the possibility of being threatened with death means we shouldn't be prepared for the time when we do need to protect our loved ones?

I'm not saying live scared, but you can live safe.  And no, I don't want to kill anybody, but when a good man's family is threatened, don't be surprised when he acts like a man.

And yes, I have been in a situation where people I lived with (roommate, not family) were threatened with death by a crazed man who broke down our door, and no, I didn't have a gun.

[basslicker]

Just now, The Unknown Poster said:

So the public doesn't need to be armed to defend themselves and others.  That's a great point.

I was making a separate point in relation to the general wussy nature/image Canada has been given, and that it is some instances false. 

[The Unknown Poster]

Just now, basslicker said:

So by your logic, the rarity of the possibility of being threatened with death means we shouldn't be prepared for the time when we do need to protect our loved ones?

I'm not saying live scared, but you can live safe.  And no, I don't want to kill anybody, but when a good man's family is threatened, don't be surprised when he acts like a man.

And yes, I have been in a situation where people I lived with (roommate, not family) were threatened with death by a crazed man who broke down our door, and no, I didn't have a gun.

Yes, by my logic.  Most people dont have Wills from the time they can drive, but we drive every day and take that risk.  The odds of needed a gun to defend yourself is rare.  Far too rare to simply allow the masses to arm themselves with increasingly powerful weapons with little to no training in how to use them, little to no training in dealing with stressful & emotional situations, little to no training in self defense & first aid.  its like giving a child a tank to drive.

Killing someone is not the act of a "man".  Are we now bringing gender roles into this?  Are women not expected/permitted to defend themselves?  I sure hope no one feels like a "man" when he takes another person's life.  That statement speaks to the heart of this issue: too many weekend warriors with their chests puffed out, walking around armed looking for justice to serve.

When I worked at a nightclub, we went out of our way to avoid hiring people looking to be "men" by physically imposing their will on people, even if those people deserved it.  Take a tense situation and add ego and cowboys and you've got a recipe for disaster.  Add guns and it gets worse.

I've been assaulted more times than I can count.  Struck with all sorts of weapons from bottles to knives to baseball bats with nails sticking out of it.  had some point a gun at me and shoot the guy beside me.  I never once wished I had a gun.  And never once did I need one.  We dont need guns.  The fact so many desperately want them is proof enough they shouldnt have them.