Is Public Exhibition of Firearms Illegal in North Carolina? - Page 4
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 81

Thread: Is Public Exhibition of Firearms Illegal in North Carolina?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Great Smoky Mountains, NC
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Mustang View Post
    I would like a question answered: In a free society what is the proper role of a police force? Should there even be one? Your arguments appear to advocate anarchy.
    In a free state, the ultimate security and continued freedom of that state is up to the free citizens, who are granted the right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution for that express purpose.

    No, it is not up to the Executive branch to protect us individually — the job of the Executive branch is to protect the NATION against all enemies foreign and domestic. However, the Second Amendment clearly calls upon citizen Militias to ensure the security of a Free State.

    This entails the armed citizenry protecting itself not only from local crime, but also from an increasingly corrupt and oppressive central government when necessary, just as the Founders intended.

    No, a well-regulated Militia is NOT another arm of the Executive branch of government. No, police forces and the National Guard DO NOT constitute citizen's Militias under the Constitution. A citizen's Militia must, of necessity, NOT be regulated by the central government.

    A citizen's Militia is well-regulated by the CITIZENRY, not the government.

    I, for one, do not believe that turning over our individual protection to the government is wise or healthy for our continued freedom. If the MILLIONS of police officers in this nation serve any purpose, it is as a RESPONSE force serving the citizenry.

    However, when a corrupt or oppressive central government is calling the shots, WHO do you think the police, or the FBI, or the BATF, or the National Guard will serve? The government? Or the citizenry?

    We already have ample evidence to answer THAT question.

    Only seldom do the police and other law enforcement agencies actually PROTECT the citizenry. More crimes are prevented by armed citizens than by police forces, and any LEO can confirm that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Mustang View Post
    How would you respond to three private citizens holding you at gunpoint on your own property whose only intent is to prevent your being robbed or murdered? I hope you can see how this scenario could get several innocent people with good intentions killed.
    I hasten to point out that the same scenario ALREADY gets many innocent people killed with police asking the questions, as well. There are many cases in which police mistakenly enter homes by force and kill innocent civilians.

    Frankly, I would feel safer if my neighbors WERE monitoring my property and DID call me rather than the police. In fact, my neighbors HAVE called to alert me to prowlers, and I have done the same for them. That's the way things SHOULD BE in this country, rather than citizens cowering in their homes, awaiting an official response force that may not arrive for 45 minutes or more.

    I'm not asking my neighbors to stand down. Neither will I stand down. I do prefer that those with "bad intentions" KNOW that I am more than adequately armed and able to defend my home, family and property.

    Trust me, the "bad guys" in this town know I am armed and that I have no qualms about publicly exhibiting my firearms. Most of the citizens in this town are similarly armed and similarly defiant in the face of fear and suspicion.

    As a result, the crime rate here is exceptionally low compared to the rest of the country. An openly armed society is, indeed, a POLITE society.
    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.

    TOXIC REIGN: Reclaim Our Future

  2.   
  3. Quote Originally Posted by Charles Austin Miller View Post
    In a free state, the ultimate security and continued freedom of that state is up to the free citizens, who are granted the right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution for that express purpose.

    No, it is not up to the Executive branch to protect us individually — the job of the Executive branch is to protect the NATION against all enemies foreign and domestic. However, the Second Amendment clearly calls upon citizen Militias to ensure the security of a Free State.

    This entails the armed citizenry protecting itself not only from local crime, but also from an increasingly corrupt and oppressive central government when necessary, just as the Founders intended.
    I guess maybe it would have been your duty to shoot the police then, to protect yourself from them, eh? The police work for the citizens, yes. In this case the majority of citizens on this forum feel that the police did their job properly. So I guess you are just S.O.L. unless you want to rise up against the majority of citizens here.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  4. #33
    No of us said you were in the wrong. We are saying that it happened as it should have and there is nothing to complain about.

    The biggest thing is you say you aren't so judgemental of people why do you have a tact weapon?
    "to defend yourself"
    Well maybe the guy banging on your door at 1am needs to use the rest room and he is wearing a ski mask because he is cold.

    If you trust the human race, get rid of any gun that you do not use for hunting, and in my state a tact shotgun can not be used to hunt with.

  5. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Great Smoky Mountains, NC
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    I guess maybe it would have been your duty to shoot the police then, to protect yourself from them, eh?
    Why would you guess something like that? Is that the first thing that comes to your mind?

    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    The police work for the citizens, yes. In this case the majority of citizens on this forum feel that the police did their job properly.
    No, the police DO NOT "work for the citizens." The police are supposed to serve the citizens, but the police work for the Executive branch of government.

    In case you haven't noticed, the Executive branch is not particularly sympathetic to the citizenry in fact, the Department of Justice has been sued for murdering citizens before.

    How often are Executive enforcers convicted for murdering citizens? Very seldom, indeed. In fact, the DOJ has refused to convict many enforcers by reason of Executive immunity.

    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    So I guess you are just S.O.L. unless you want to rise up against the majority of citizens here.
    It has occurred to me that the "majority of citizens here" are not responsible and conscientious gun owners at all; but are, rather, shills for the anti-gun movement. I've seen other professed "gun sites" where the membership is loaded with anti-gunners.
    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.

    TOXIC REIGN: Reclaim Our Future

  6. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Great Smoky Mountains, NC
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by nraynes View Post
    If you trust the human race, get rid of any gun that you do not use for hunting, and in my state a tact shotgun can not be used to hunt with.
    Where did I say that I trust the human race? Can you link me to that statement? I said that I have issues with American gun owners mistrusting each other — which is going to lead to the loss of our RIGHTS to keep and bear arms.

    There is no place in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution where it says citizens may keep and bear arms FOR HUNTING ONLY. It doesn't mention hunting at all. Neither does it mention crime-fighting.

    Specifically, the Second Amendment says that the citizens may keep and bear arms to ENSURE a FREE STATE. That means taking up arms against other human beings who are attempting to REMOVE your freedoms.

    It means taking up arms and fighting your own government when necessary, just as the Founders fought their (British) government. Because an oppressive government does not want the citizens armed.

    It's the FIRST order of business for a tyrannical government to DISARM the citizens.

    It sounds as though a great many of you are not merely "law-abiding" gun owners, but are very severely misinformed about your own rights as gun owners. So much so, it seems, that you can't recognize unconstitutional activities by the government, even when they DO infringe on your right to keep and bear arms.

    It's not your "duty" as citizens to mindlessly obey the 23,000 federal and local gun-control laws that exist to REMOVE your rights. It is your duty as American citizens to FIGHT these laws — through the ballot — and likewise vote out the politicians who are STEALING your rights, day-by-day.

    But it sounds as though there aren't too many fighters on this forum.
    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.

    TOXIC REIGN: Reclaim Our Future

  7. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Great Smoky Mountains, NC
    Posts
    60
    When I started this thread, I asked a simple question — a question to which I already knew the answer.

    My intent was to elicit the opinions of the forum members here regarding our RIGHTS to keep and bear arms.

    As expected, the discussion quickly coalesced around "suspicious" behavior... Which is the socio-political climate that has evolved in America just over the last two decades, due to "terrorist" propaganda here and abroad.

    This government has endeavored to turn Americans against one another, using the tools of fear and suspicion and mistrust. For that reason, I characterize our Central Government as the true terrorist entity in America.

    They use fear to turn Americans against one another, to turn gun owners against one another, and to intimidate Americans into standing by and DOING NOTHING as their Liberty is rapidly eroded.

    It should make you sick to your stomachs.
    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.

    TOXIC REIGN: Reclaim Our Future

  8. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Austin Miller View Post

    Well, I'm NOT going to jump to the conclusion that somebody is committing a crime or is about to commit a crime because I see him on private property with what appears to be a firearm. I don't think like that. I'm not so fearful and suspicious that I mistrust the American gun owner.
    Your right you only trust someone with a gun. However we all know BGs don't have guns.

    what we have been saying is that even though you were not in the wrong, things still went as they should of in the since that you aren't in jail but the police still made sure nothing was wrong. You said yourself it wasn't a neighbour who reported you. They were watching out for who ever lived in the house because they didn't know! Deal with it they didn't want anyone hurt. That is why they reported it. If you don't like it move out to the middle of the woods or a huge farm away from everyone.

    The biggest thing that bothers me about your argument is your picture that shows you holding a hand gun and a bar-fight Bowie against your neck which shows you not being so careful with them.

  9. The thing that bothers me about Mr. Miller's arguement is it is really no arguement at all. He refuses to directly address points made against him and uses whatever flimsy seguay he can construct to allow him to propagate revolutionary rhetoric.

    His arguement is full of inconsistancies. He purchases a gun for self defense, likely against other armed men. Yet he claims to trust every gun owner implicitly enough to leave them to do what they like.

    He claim to follow "every" firarm safety rule and yet uses an avatar photo which appears to violate all of Col. Cooper's 4 rules and all but one of the NRA's 3 fundamental rules of firearms safety (or all three if the revolver is loaded).

    He claims that he "never ponted the shotgun off of his property" a statement which could only be true if he always ponted it at the ground or suitable backstop or if his property extended to maximum theoretical range in every direction from wherever the shotgun was located.

    From his rhetoric he appears to resent any form of central authority yet he practicaly purrs when the police admire his shotgun.

    Last and perhaps the most severe. He claims to be about individual rights and yet appears to advocate revolution a political move which with one possible exception in history devolves into anarchy then tyranny. I am through with your rhetoric sir.

    Good day
    "Get this through your head! We're not fighting to have everybody think the way we do, we're fighting so that people can think whatever they want! Even if they don't agree with us!"--Stalker, GI JOE #39

  10. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Austin Miller View Post
    When I started this thread, I asked a simple question a question to which I already knew the answer.
    Which is the true definition of a stupid question especially when you refuse to even listen to anyone else's answer.


    My intent was to elicit the opinions of the forum members here regarding our RIGHTS to keep and bear arms.
    No, as others have stated your intent was to gain compliance in your bashing of everyone involved for trying to help you out and justify your idiotic actions of running around in your front yard in the middle of the night playing with your gun. If you claim you weren't playing with it then just what do you call it when there was by your own admission no threat and you were showing it off to your friend and then to the cops. That my friend is playing with your gun.

    As expected, the discussion quickly coalesced around "suspicious" behavior... Which is the socio-political climate that has evolved in America just over the last two decades, due to "terrorist" propaganda here and abroad.
    "Suspicious behavior" from the man with a super-duper tactical shotgun with a super powerful blinding tactical flsahlight mounted on the end of it. Why in the world do you need such a thing if there is no need to be suspicious of anyone.

    This government has endeavored to turn Americans against one another, using the tools of fear and suspicion and mistrust. For that reason, I characterize our Central Government as the true terrorist entity in America.

    They use fear to turn Americans against one another, to turn gun owners against one another, and to intimidate Americans into standing by and DOING NOTHING as their Liberty is rapidly eroded.

    It should make you sick to your stomachs.

  11. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Great Smoky Mountains, NC
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by nraynes View Post
    The biggest thing that bothers me about your argument is your picture that shows you holding a hand gun and a bar-fight Bowie against your neck which shows you not being so careful with them.
    And exactly WHAT is unsafe or careless about that pose? So I posed for a photo with Ruger 357 Mag and a Damascus head-cutter (blade out). So what?

    What exactly scares or bothers you about that photo?
    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.

    TOXIC REIGN: Reclaim Our Future

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... 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