Open carry incident in Nashville gets me detained 2.5 hour at gun point carried AK-47 - Page 17
Page 17 of 29 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 282

Thread: Open carry incident in Nashville gets me detained 2.5 hour at gun point carried AK-47

  1. #161
    Thank you, sir, appreciate your taking the time to post. Welcome to the site! Hang around...I believe you will find it quite interesting overall, and it wouldn't hurt us to have your insights as well, as a 2A supporter perhaps not quite as strident as most of us are.

  2.   
  3. #162
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Florida Panhandle
    Posts
    3,098

    Exclamation Thanks for your wisdom

    Quote Originally Posted by AHFranklin View Post
    Have never posted here, but thought that I'd chime in for a little local feedback. I found this forum when searching for information about this event, since I live in Franklin Tennessee and this has sparked some discussion.

    First, a little background. I'm a strong 2nd Amendment supporter, and have been a lifelong firearms owner. I wholeheartedly believe that anybody of sound mind and without a serious criminal background should be able to carry a concealed weapon anywhere that they see fit, with few exceptions (schools, etc). I choose not to carry a concealed weapon, but believe that I should have the right to do so if I should so choose.

    Most of my friends and neighbors believe the same, to one extent or another. Most of my friends and neighbors are also not nearly as passionate about gun rights as any person on this discussion board - nor are the majority of people in the US. The folks here on this discussion forum are the people that care enough to discuss, debate, and think about gun ownership and gun rights on a day to day basis. You're probably friends with people that have the same or similar interests. That's all well and good, but frankly your desire to discuss and debate the nuances of this issue (whether the gun was a pistol or an assault rifle; whether painting the tip orange was a good idea or not; etc etc etc) far exceed the level of discourse that is taking on a local, dining room level in Franklin.

    What *is* occurring is this: people locally (who otherwise are generally supportive of gun rights) are saying things like "did you hear about the guy who was walking around downtown with an assault rifle? What on earth was he thinking?" I've explained that it was actually a pistol, and that he was within his rights, and the general response that I get back is "I don't really see the difference, I don't want people walking around our downtown with AK-47's. If the law now allows this to take place, then we need to get the law changed."

    You can call these people misinformed (and don't try and blame the media, even though they did get most of the details of the story wrong - most of this has come about because this guy was seen by a lot of people, and a number of those people spoke to their friends and neighbors and so on...), you can call them whatever you want. They represent your average, conservative resident of Franklin, and they are generally rather vocal and educated, and don't have any problem emailing or calling their elected representatives when they see something that upsets them taking place.

    I understand that this individual was well within his rights, and did nothing illegal. He has made a point, both to law enforcement and, more importantly, to the general public in my community. Kudos - he won the tactical battle, but did amazing strategic damage to the cause in the greater war.

    There is sometimes a rather wide gulf between what one CAN do, and what one SHOULD do. In between those two lies judgement, and in this case it looks as if poor judgement is the consensus of the dispassionate general public.
    You have given us a very valuable gift of what is going on right there right now. We do not have to second guess each other about what folks think Thanks for the post. Please keep it up!
    FESTUS
    IN OMNIA PARATUS

  4. #163
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sunny South Florida
    Posts
    486
    Thank you AHFranklin for your input. It confirms what a lot here believe, that he did much more damage to the "cause" than he did to gain support.

    In reality, what the fanatics on both sides think here is irrelevant, what is important is what IS "dining room" level discussion in Franklin or other Franklins in the country and as noted moves like this create a "we need to change the law to ban this" attitude ... that is not the direction that anyone who claims they are a 2A supporter should desire to go.

  5. #164
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    OHIO
    Posts
    2,109
    How many people who saw the man and or the newscast
    (if you can call it that, more like a liescast)

    NOW KNOW the following things they may not have known before:
    (or maybe would have never had the chance to ever know if he wouldnt have done it)

    1; Open carry is a legal activity

    2; That there is an AK variant that is a pistol

    3; That an "Evil Assault Weapon" was being carried around and it didnt go on a killing rampage?

    Wow, that is just irreparable damage to the "cause" right there.

  6. #165
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The High Country
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Axeanda45 View Post
    The Constitution of this once great nation, specifically the 2nd Amendment, forbids ANY and ALL laws that would infringe at all or have anything whatsoever to do with firearms. No amount of discussion will change this fact.
    Dude, all I can say about that is if that's what you interpret out of reading the 2nd amendment you must be delusuional.
    Quote Originally Posted by Axeanda45 View Post
    Using Scripture 100% out of context only shows you have no clue what the Bible is for or what it means.
    That's like the 3rd or maybe 4th time now you have asserted members posting here "have no clue." Yep, nothing wrong with you, it's just the rest of society that must be f'ed up. Riiiight.
    Quote Originally Posted by AHFranklin View Post
    the general response that I get back is "I don't really see the difference, I don't want people walking around our downtown with AK-47's...
    And there you have it: What people "see." That is what matters here. That is what was intentionally instigated in the park. A perfect example of the wrong thing for the right reason.

    The OP and his new buddy Axeanda45, (who I believe are probably one and the same, BTW) just don't get it. It doesn't matter what the law is, what their rights are, what color the weapon was or anything else regarding alot of what has been discussed ad nauseum in this thread. It's about people's, the general populace's perception of gun owners, their rights and those implications for THEM.

    The guy's just smart enough to be dangerous to the cause, but not quite dumb enough to invoke suicide by police. Hope he finds that happy medium soon.

  7. #166
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vermont (least gun control in America!)
    Posts
    10
    My last post: My main concern was how supposedly trained defenders of our rights (i.e., LEOs) responded to the situation, not how the general public perceives it. On that note, however, I believe we all need to push back real hard against those irrational notions that an orange semiautomatic nonchalantly carried on a hiking trail by--oh my god--someone in a camouflage jacket is something horrible to behold. I personally see absolutely nothing wrong OR alarming about such a thing and wish everybody did it. How long do you think the general public will allow gun freedom if they're permitted to wallow in these stupid beliefs? How effective do you think our defense of gun freedom will be when we cower with our tails between our legs and beg forgiveness whenever one of us--entirely within our rights--offends the order of political correctness? Those of you blubbering about the "strategic" loss here are apologizing our rights away.

  8. #167
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    OHIO
    Posts
    2,109
    Excellent post BillW

  9. #168
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sunny South Florida
    Posts
    486
    Quote Originally Posted by BillW View Post
    My main concern was how supposedly trained defenders of our rights (i.e., LEOs) responded to the situation , not how the general public perceives it. ...
    Since when are LEO trained to defend our "RIGHTS"? LEO's are trained to protect the safety of themselves first and the public second (because a dead cop defends no one), and under that training believe me YOU HAVE NO DAMN RIGHTS!

    It is up to the COURTS to defend your rights. That is how the PEOPLE who wrote those rights designed it, that is how it is. LEO's are taught not to violate ones rights as a matter of common sense, but when common sense challenges perceived safety, safety will trump your "rights" every time.

    Your "rights" are simply law that was written by men, members of the PUBLIC who wrote that law based on their perception. Today whether you have rights or not is based on what the legislatures and the courts say. Both are made up of and highly influenced by the perception of members of the PUBLIC!

    If you for a minute believe that you are going to be able to use your arms to protect your "rights" based on infringement then you will be sorely mistaken and likely dead. You may die for your cause, which puts you right there with suicide bombers and others who make little or no difference other than to rid the world of themselves.

    YES, if the government took up arms and attacked the populous then the people would likely rise up and band together to defend themselves ... 'A WELL REGULATED MILITA BEING NECCESSARY'.

    However that scenerio is really very unlikely to happen. If the government decided to ban all firearms and began the house to house seizure that so many predict, YOU WILL NOT see an armed uprising by the masses. You WILL see hundreds of thousands of firearms turned in and a much less safe country left behind. You may see pockets of violence, which will be quickly and fatally surpressed but not to the point of stimulating an uprising ... we are not mentally prepared as a country for that yet.

    It is ONLY the perception of the people influencing those in decision making power that prevents these actions from being unleashed.

    I appologize NOT for complaining about those who influence that perception negitively and if you believe that walking around with a show of force will HELP you keep those rights, I appologize NOT for what will happen to you and those rights in the future.

  10. #169
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    OHIO
    Posts
    2,109
    Quote Originally Posted by Cocked _and_Locked View Post
    Dude, all I can say about that is if that's what you interpret out of reading the 2nd amendment you must be delusuional.
    .
    Wow, I am delusional for seeing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in the way they are written and how the ones that wrote them meant them be. Thank you sir, for including me in such distinguished company as our Founding Fathers.

    I really dont deserve to even stand in their shadow, but thanks again for your compliment.

  11. We all have friends, relatives or spouses that do NOT share our passion for guns but allow us to indulge and they place a tremendous amount of trust in our gun judgement and decisions. The general populous is required to do that also. Hey the guy next to you may have a gun. How does he look? How is he acting? What is he doing? Is he suspicious?

    These are very valid observations and thoughts especially by those that are not interested in guns. The OP was within 'legal' and 'constitutional' rights by his stunts but he violated the common sense required to own a gun and the 'trust' of the general populous by his antics.

    OK so you don't give a flyin' flip by God he did nothing illegal. The problem is 'legality' has nothing to do with the misery that can be inflicted by a majority that is fearful aka 'Chicago' or 'DC' or New Orleans. When the OP is successful in getting some 'illegal' ban instituted in his community or in TN because of the fear he created then is he then going to fight this injustice with his own money?

Page 17 of 29 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast