What to say to an open carry visitor at church? - Page 29
Page 29 of 33 FirstFirst ... 192728293031 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 290 of 323

Thread: What to say to an open carry visitor at church?

  1. #281
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    ENOUGH!

    Is "Cypher" also "Treo"?

    I want to know the actual factual truth. Because...

    If a poster will use a fake name to present controversial postings hoping to protect their other name from being associated with that controversy... then... that person is being less than honest and very much less than honorable. Which also casts that persons postings (from both user names!) in a less than honorable and less than honest light.

    So... Cypher.. this is directed specifically at you...

    Are you and Treo one and the same person/poster on USACarry?
    I thought treo got banned...not sure there is a need to protect his other name if they are the same person.

    Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  2.   
  3. #282
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,422
    Treo claims he can see New Life Church from his home. He states knowledge of at least parking lot security and of Jeanne Assam's work-status at the church on the day she engaged the shooter there. (All public knowledge, but he cites only his own knowledge, not the news or the web or whatever.)

    Cypher claims in this thread that he is a member of New Life Church, says he is a Church Elder, says "we were actually in the news because of a shooting that happened on our campus a few years back that was stopped by an armed parishioner" implying that he was there (slightly different story than Treo simply saying he could see the church from his window), and also says that, "...I could put a different plainclothes volunteer right behind your seat every time and you’d never know that’s what I did," suggesting that he has direct security responsibilities at the church.

    Treo claims knowledge of specific details of the shooting at New Life Church and of Jeanne Assam's subsequent (and false) claim of having killed the shooter.

    Cypher cites his access to "security incident reports" to open one of the (now) three threads on OC'ers that either started or morphed into New Life Church-centric threads.

    Treo demands Scriptural cites to "back up" something someone said:

    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    That's fine please cite the Scripture that you're using to back this up I'd like to check it out for myself.
    Cypher demands Scriptural cites to "back up" something someone said:

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypher View Post
    This sounds more like Muslim theology than Christian but you are certainly welcome to back this statement up with Scripture.
    I am not questioning the validity of asking for cites/links/documentation on any subject within any serious discussion. I'm just comparing the language, syntax, context, even the consistent punctuation errors evident in "both" posters' way of writing.

    A casual comparison side-by-side of these "two" posters' writing style, and the content they are "both" interested in writing about will reveal WAY too many "coincidences" to ignore as even being within the realm of possibility that they are, indeed, coincidences.

    As of this writing, Treo's last post was on 8/20/2013, as he was busy baiting me and I refused to take the bait by putting him on ignore.

    Cypher joined on 8/19/2013, and one of his first posts, if not his first, was stating his opinion that both I and "Treo" should be banned. Unfortunately, that thread got deleted. I didn't understand it at the time, but later found out that calling for "Treo" to be banned was to set himself up to discredit anyone (like me) when they recognized his unmistakable syntax and spelling and punctuation errors and called him on it.

    They "both" carry a S&W 6906. Cypher saying so:

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypher View Post
    ...I carry a S&W 6906 the majority of the time
    And Treo saying so:

    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    For instance I have a S&W 6906 compact that I carry....
    They "both" chose cartoon characters for their avatars.

    They "both" have references to either my name or something I said to "them" in their "respective" headers when "they" post. (I said Treo was a "pusillanimous poltroon more than a year ago, which he has held a grudge about and brought up incessantly ever since.) Cypher thinks he's in my head because I figured out the blatantly obvious truth and said it out loud.

    I asked Cypher to answer the same question you did Bikenut. Nearly the same words in fact. I believe he used an obfuscatory trick to put the word "no" where it wasn't in relation to the question I asked. I can't find it right now, maybe it got deleted too, but if he lowers himself enough to answer you at all Bikenut, I suggest you scrutinize it carefully. He's a freakin' master of obfuscation, and always has been, whether going by the nick "Treo" or "Cypher."

    All I can say is that if anyone can accept all the "coincidences" that exist between these "two" posters, they can accept that God made two people so much alike that they are indistinguishable if there weren't names attached to their posts.

    Would anyone here not recognize my posts if I changed nothing in the way I write but my name? How about Bikenut's or Ringo's or Firefighterchen's or buckey's or gunnerbob's or Stengun's or tricolordad's or the list goes on and on and on? Of course not. It's all right there. You don't need "Cypher's" "confession." You just need to compare and use what God gave you to recognize the Truth when it's right in front of you; your power of reasoning. Treo is Cypher, Cypher is Treo, no matter how "he" answers your question, if at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by K7lvo View Post
    You have completely demonstrated the inability to look at the situation objectively.
    How does one go about being objective between the truth and a lie?

    Quote Originally Posted by K7lvo View Post
    Yes, militant OC'ers consider OC'ing THE most important thing, and attempt to deflect/redirect in any way possible in a vain attempt to support their point.
    "Militant" you say? Point out where anyone has spoken any kind of "fighting" words regarding exercising their preference to OC rather than CC. When you can't find it, you can add that to the list of dishonesty your side of the argument has engaged in in this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by K7lvo View Post
    Okay, the more reasonable of us have that figuringed out. The point has been made. The anti-gunners march on, while factions of the pro gunners eat each other. For this reason, I'm done with this.
    Finally, you have said something honest; you consider your side "reasonable" and "pro-gun" while OC'ers are helping the anti-gun side with their "unreasonableness." IOW, you are better than OC'ers. That's a perfect epilogue to your participation in this thread. Buh-Bye now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Firefighterchen View Post
    I thought treo got banned...not sure there is a need to protect his other name if they are the same person.
    Treo did not get banned, he just chose this new persona to escape the mountains of proof I had that he was a serial liar.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  4. #283
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    Quote Originally Posted by K7lvo View Post
    You have completely demonstrated the inability to look at the situation objectively. Yes, militant OC'ers consider OC'ing THE most important thing, and attempt to deflect/redirect in any way possible in a vain attempt to support their point. Okay, the more reasonable of us have that figuringed out. The point has been made. The anti-gunners march on, while factions of the pro gunners eat each other. For this reason, I'm done with this.
    I'm sorry, there is no sound reasoning in your church's logic whatsoever. Which brings me to believe there is nothing reasonable coming from the anti open carry duo.

    Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  5. #284
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan
    Posts
    3,355
    Quote Originally Posted by K7lvo View Post
    You are tooooo much! Cypher has posted his thoughts and his church's policies in straightforward, understandable ways, only to be met by spitting and snarling dersion, attempts to justify and/or divert - much like your above post - and failure to respond to the most simple question (Where do you OC'ers go to church?)

    The one thing I've learned about militant OC'ers is that they will sacrifice EVERYTHING in an attempt to justify their position.
    Again with the expectation that a person must first attend a church before being able to comment on the hypocritical policies of a church. You do understand that what you are really saying is that unless I am "one of you"... then I, and my comments, have no merit simply because I am not "one of you"?

    I personally have stated that I do not attend any building with a congregation commonly called a "church" because of the kinds of hypocrisy evident in a policy that bans OC but condones CC in the name of "security" and "preventing disturbances". And I've stated that my contention with that policy isn't about open carry or concealed carry but is about the hypocrisy of the policy itself and how that hypocrisy taints the veracity of the entire church.

    I have presented my perspective on how a policy of an open carry ban while allowing unfettered concealed carry in the name of "security" and/or "preventing disturbances" is hypocritical because banning open carry while allowing unfettered concealed carry certainly doesn't make the church more secure since anyone wanting to cause problems would bring their gun in concealed in order to have that magical "element of surprise" upon the congregation. Not to mention that if open carry is a disturbance then so would a concealed gun that was accidentally exposed be a disturbance.

    Now kindly explain how my presentation of my perspective is not straightforward and understandable?

  6. #285
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Living rent free in Bluesstringer's head apparently
    Posts
    148
    I'm almost afraid to say it but the strife in this thread is borderline demonic. I'm done with it
    The finest Vodka is a razor Matthew, it leaves no ragged edges.

  7. While this has been a long and lengthy discussion, I have yet to see an OC at church. (excluding LEO), but a rash of burglaries to worshipers cars had prompted CC in parking lot security (deacons).

    Sent from my Milestone X using Tapatalk 2

  8. #287
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    Quote Originally Posted by maestromsv View Post
    While this has been a long and lengthy discussion, I have yet to see an OC at church. (excluding LEO), but a rash of burglaries to worshipers cars had prompted CC in parking lot security (deacons).

    Sent from my Milestone X using Tapatalk 2
    I wouldn't recommend confronting criminals if you have a choice. Did you call the police and request officers stay in the vicinity of your church during service? A call to 911 and a shout that police were called will most likely scare off the criminals...if it doesn't I know I wouldn't want to be the one to confront such a person, gun or not.

    Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  9. #288
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,832
    Quote Originally Posted by Cypher View Post
    So in summation regardless of what church and all other considerations aside not allowing open carry is a deal breaker?

    Can you see where that might lead someone to surmise that the ability to open carry is THE MOST IMPORTANT DECIDING FACTOR in you choosing a church?
    Do you read???? He said that open carry not being allowed, while allowing CC is hypocritical, no matter how you present it.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
    ~ Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

  10. Those working the parking lot were in pairs, and the church is located 4 blocks from the police station. The parking lot is very long and when those big ac units kick on, you can't hear yourself talk.
    Everything you said is on the money, the BG just getting brave or more stupid.

    Sent from my Milestone X using Tapatalk 2

  11. #290
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by Farmhood View Post
    Just like any business no shirt no shoes no service. It is the owners right. You have the right to go where you choose. Ain't American great!
    You can do whatever you want on your property. That goes for churches too. That doesn't make it right, it doesn't make it not hypocrisy, and it doesn't make it right.

    I don't OC. I just don't—in my case, it WOULD create a disturbance because of my disability. But I would not choose to attend a church that was so hostile to my brothers and sisters in Christ. Because OC is so important? No, because welcoming my brothers and sisters is so important. It trumps all, actually.

    And yes, I actually did once leave a church because it institutionalized its hostility toward certain Christians. Guns were not involved.

Page 29 of 33 FirstFirst ... 192728293031 ... LastLast

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