What if someone grabs your firearm while you are Open Carrying? - Page 13
Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 141

Thread: What if someone grabs your firearm while you are Open Carrying?

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    State of Confusion
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    Translation: "Uh...I got nuthin' and my ego is much too fragile to acknowledge any valid challenges to my utter awesomeness."

    I haven't the inclination nor the power to make a stranger a thousand miles away look foolish. Only they can do that to themselves. I only respond to what is written, BC. It is your umm...burden to write in such a way as to preclude any valid implication that you're being foolish. And I never cloak my shots, BC. If I thought you a fool, I'd say it loud and clear (you'll notice I did not just take the opportunity to call you a fool or foolish). And in the context of this thread and the couple of exchanges we've had in it, you saying that I'm being obtuse and intentionally argumentative is ironically hilarious. What was the topic again, grabbing guns from OC'ers or studying stats of all shootings over decades? Keep those jokes comin' BC. You're better at being unintentionally humorous than discussing the topic at hand with any aplomb, focus or substantiation for your positions.

    Blues? The topic isn't worth discussing with you. Period......................

  3. #122
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Quote Originally Posted by BC1 View Post
    Blues? The topic isn't worth discussing with you. Period......................
    BC? You never got around to actually discussing the topic with me or anyone else, so why would that post be any different......Question mark?

    And gee....six days since the post you're ostensibly "replying" to, and that's the best you can do? You'd have had more credibility just letting sleeping dogs lie.

    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. uppercut or put my hands up

  5. #124
    If a BG made a move for my weapon when OP, and I had time to deflect him I would do so, if not and he or she got a hold of my gun and did not shoot me with it I would put my hands up and at the first chance I got I would pull one of my two bugs and most likely put a end to the problem, if this is to simple for some, sorry but almost nothing is ever accomplished running a thread for 14 pages of BS
    Bad Guys of the world beware the next time you think about jumping on a old guy, because its a fair bet he's to old to fight and probably to fat to run, but can put one in your eye at 50ft with his weak hand

  6. #125
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Ingham co. MI
    if it's a young child, firmly grab the wrist, pull it away and then give a scolding.

    anyone else? theres a reason i carry a knife weakside up front. knife goes into the wrist, turn around and react appropriately by drawing and ordering to the ground, if they produce a weapon or continue towards you, react accordingly again, doesnt matter if it is a criminal trying to kill you, some retarded cop or security guard that doesnt like guns, anti trying to prove a point or an old fudd that wants you to only conceal carry 1911's. any deliberate act by an adult or teen to grab your gun should be treated as an attempt on your life.

    but theres always other variables, i just threw out a response for the most basic, likely ones ive prepared for.
    The best resource for anything and everything open carry!


  7. Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Dollar View Post
    Again, town of around 300 fifty of whom are my family I don't even feel the need to carry unless I'm going to Weatherford why in the Hell would I bother to open carry? If I started walking around here with a gun on my hip they'd think I'd lost my mind.

    As for supporting the second Amendment I'll bet there are 200 or so pick ups in this town and 175 of them have NRA stickers in the back window, I think we're good
    Like a lot of anti-OC arguments, the above two statements are contradictory. If 175 of your neighbors have NRA stickers (implication/assumption = they are NRA members) then why would they think you had lost your mind by open carrying?

    Unless, of course, you really mean that 175 of your neighbors are OC Fudds. Which is it?

    OC Fudd: A gun owner who supports the 2nd Amendment but only as long as you carry your gun the way he approves of (i.e. concealed carry).

    We won the war against the Fudds; we'll win the war against the OC Fudds. Next up will be the infringement-training Fudds.

  8. #127
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Quote Originally Posted by FTG-05 View Post
    Like a lot of anti-OC arguments, the above two statements are contradictory. If 175 of your neighbors have NRA stickers (implication/assumption = they are NRA members) then why would they think you had lost your mind by open carrying?

    Unless, of course, you really mean that 175 of your neighbors are OC Fudds. Which is it?

    OC Fudd: A gun owner who supports the 2nd Amendment but only as long as you carry your gun the way he approves of (i.e. concealed carry).

    We won the war against the Fudds; we'll win the war against the OC Fudds. Next up will be the infringement-training Fudds.
    It is not contradictory, N R A = OC fudd organization. Permit-less open carry...well it goes against " "workable....gun control legislation" since the N R A's inception.
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    Nobody asked you to make a list of anything. I asked you to substantiate your claim that the N R A has taken cases to the Supreme Court by giving just one example. But that's alright. I knew when I asked you that not only would you likely not even try, but that you would fail if you did try to find one, because not one single case exists in which the N R A is a petitioner.

    So back to the topic. Njsportsman, as you can see, my questions about Nazi gun control were completely ignored, as I fully expected them to be. I hope you're still checking in here and will see what I'm going to post sometime within the next ~24 hours. It probably won't take that long, but I will have to hand-type some information I want you to have that comes out of a book that I can't fit in my scanner. I will substantiate the following claims (at least):

    1) A U.S Senator who was formerly a member of the prosecutor's team at the Nuremberg Trials between 1945 and 1946, used Nazi gun control laws that he is proven to have had his own personal copies of as the nearly-identical basis for the provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968.

    2) The N R A publicly backed passage of GCA68.

    3) As GCA68 progressed through revisions that included full-on registration schemes, the N R A realized that its membership would not support going that far, and instead of dropping their support for the Nazi-inspired legislation, they simply said in public what they perceived their membership would want to hear, while continuing to help the Senator in getting it passed. In the end, Congress disallowed the registration scheme, but GCA68 remains as one of two, along with NFA34, of the most 2A-usurping federal bills in the history of the country, and N R A supported it both above and under the table.

    (N R A also supported NFA34, but I will not be focusing on that betrayal in the upcoming post.)

    Be back later, probably tomorrow, with the substantiation I promised. Stay tuned.

    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    Alright, njsportsman and anyone else who is still interested, I have put Warbirds on ignore and will not be distracted anymore from making my case about the N R A's many betrayals of actual 2nd Amendment supporters, advocates and activists. Those betrayals go (at least) as far back as the N R A lending its support for NFA34, all the way up to its support for a bill right here in Alabama last year that, before we were able to get the offending verbiage removed from the bill (no thanks to the N R A), would have eliminated the state preemption law that serves to protect us from going from legal to illegal by simply crossing a county or city limits line. However, I am only going to focus on their most disgusting and injurious betrayal (that I'm aware of at least), the Gun Control Act of 1968. So here we go. Get comfy. This won't be short.

    Claim #1:
    A U.S Senator who was formerly a member of the prosecutor's team at the Nuremberg Trials between 1945 and 1946, used Nazi gun control laws that he is proven to have had his own personal copies of as the nearly-identical basis for the provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968.

    Anyone truly interested in understanding the origins of GCA68 should make their first stop Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO) and read their article/advertisement for a book entitled, "Gun Control's Nazi Connection." In that article all of the evidence that JPFO uncovered about the near-identical provisions between the Nazi Weapons Law of 1938 (NWL38) and the GCA68 30 years later are described in in-depth detail. Actual scans of their documentation are withheld from being published on their website though, because as I allude to above, that page is also advertising the book that they're marketing which does contain the scans ("Gun Control: Gateway to Tyranny"). That is the book that I said I wouldn't be able to scan myself, so when I get to the point that I include information from the book itself, I will have to describe it and not provide pictures of it. Some quotes from those scans are included at the JPFO link too though, so it's not like the information isn't available, just the scans of the information aren't unless you buy the book. So on we go.....

    JPFO set out to explain how and why GCA68 came to be law. They weren't investigating any Nazi connections or N R A involvement in the beginning, they just wanted to be able to knowledgeably inform their membership and readers about its origins. Their investigation took them all the way to Germany though. They just followed leads as they presented themselves. Here's an excerpt from the above link explaining generally what they were able to prove:

    Now, the last two sentences are what's documented in the book with scans. I cannot provide the side-by-side comparisons, but I can provide at least the information about section-by-section provisions that are just one line-item away from being identical. A "Senator Dodd" is mentioned here, and he is the Senator whom I mentioned as having been proven to have his own copies of the Nazi gun control laws prior to authoring the GCA68 bill. Here goes with that:

    There was not any traditional basis in American law to curb ownership of firearms other than machine guns so Senator Dodd and other legislators drew from German Law 1928 and NWL38 as the basis to create their legislation. There is no believable alternate conclusion to be drawn. The parallels are staggering.

    1.GCA68, Created the overseeing agency, the ATF. - NWL38, designated the SS (Schutzstaffel or Defense Squadron) and SA (Sturm Abteilung or Storm Section) as overseers.

    2.GCA68, Established that all who deal in firearms sales and manufacturing be federally licensed. - German Law 1928, all who own and sell firearms must be licensed.

    3.GCA68, No interstate transfer of firearms between non-licensees

    4.GCA68, No shipping of firearms through the mail

    5.GCA68, Established minimum age for firearms purchasers. - NWL38, age established at 18.

    6.GCA68, Required all firearms to have serial numbers. - NWL38, all firearms must have serial numbers.

    7.GCA68, Expanded definition of "prohibited persons." - NWL38, created list of prohibited persons.

    8.GCA68, Established the US concept of "non-sporting purpose" firearms. - NWL38, banned "non-sporting" firearms.

    9.GCA68, Established Form 4473 (defacto gun registration). - NWL38, created registration for guns and gun owners.

    10.GCA68, Restricted import and sale of "Saturday Night Special" handguns. - NWL38, added handguns to restricted list.

    11.GCA68, Established sentencing guidelines for firearm-involved crimes. - German Law1928, established sentences for firearms violations

    If you read the link you will find that the NWL38 is a replacement of the Weimar gun laws enacted in 1928, so whenever you see the 1928 law cited, that means it was a provision carried over and duplicated in NWL38.

    I will get to N R A's support for GCA68 in a moment, but want to highlight something here before I do. The origins of GCA68 are Nazi through and through. The only provision missing in GCA68 compared to NWL38 is that NWL38 mandated registration of both firearms and people who owned them. Jews, Gypsies and other specific classes or ethnicities were prohibited altogether from being eligible for registration, and if you want to break that out as a separate provision not included in GCA68, be my guest, but the point is about Nazi gun control for the purposes of this post, not the racist laws that inspired it. Whatever though, one or two (your choice) provisions didn't make it into GCA68 from literally copying the Nazi's version of gun control. As to registration not being included, it wasn't for a lack of trying though, and even LBJ and Senator Dodd made public pronouncements of severe disappointment about that fact on the day LBJ had the signing ceremony (maybe more on that later, but it's not really relative to the points I'm making here).

    I am going to try to condense as much as is possible the connections of Dodd to the NWL38. If it seems disjointed or incomplete, just go to the JPFO link above and read it in its entirety, but here are a few excerpts to try to begin to substantiate the claim anyway:

    So here's the sequence of events that have to be completely ignored in order to conclude that GCA68 wasn't a near-direct copy of NWL38:

    1) Dodd spent a year in Germany investigating and prosecuting Nazi war crimes. As such, he had access to any and all seized documentation of how the Nazis operated. That access included archived, updated and obsolete records as well.

    2) Early in his career as Senator, Dodd started introducing legislation consistent with NWL38.

    3) Four months before GCA68 was signed into law, Dodd is proven (by Congressional records no less) to have supplied his own copy of NWL38 to the Library of Congress for translation from German to English.

    4) Four months later, GCA68 was signed into law, missing only one gun control provision (registration) that LBJ, Dodd and the rest of the gun-grabbers in Congress at the time couldn't get passed in the debates leading up to its passage, to their great disappointment and consternation.

    Conclusion: GCA68 is a direct copy of the last NAZI gun control law to be in effect before 1945 when they were defeated in WWII.

    My next post will document and prove that the N R A not only supported GCA68, but they went "underground" so to speak, feigning opposition to its members and for public consumption, but continuing their support behind the scenes. It won't take nearly as long a post to wrap that up. Stand by....

    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. #128
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    Now then, we've established with no reasonable doubt that Sen. Thomas J. Dodd acquired copies of the NWL38 that he had wide open access to while in Germany as a prosecutor and investigator at the Nuremberg Trials between 1945 and 1946, and that all but one gun control provision from NWL38 made it into GCA68, which Dodd not only authored, but he Chaired the committee that allowed that Nazi piece of trash to get to the Floor for a full Senate vote to begin with.

    I make no claim here that the N R A had any knowledge of the Nazi origins of GCA68, but I will prove with their upper-echelon officials' own words that they supported its passage, even to the point of seemingly bragging about it to their members in two different issues of their magazine, The American Rifleman. This will be easy because I've written about it before. But I did find another writer who connects the dots more succinctly than I have before, so I'm going to excerpt from this posting on "Keep and Bear Arms.com." The author uses the exact same source material that I have in the past, they just put it together differently than I have, so here's some fresh, new prose for y'all's enjoyment: LOL

    KeepAndBearArms.com — The National Rifle Association has been called "the largest and oldest gun control organization in America" by more than a few gun owners. A fair amount of evidence supports their claim.

    As the Gun Control Act of 1968 was nearing the President's desk, NRA was being accused by Senator Robert Kennedy (D-NY) of not supporting "any legislation to try and control the misuse of rifles and pistols in this country." Naturally, NRA needed to respond to the allegation, and they responded with great detail and unusual candor.

    To deflect Senator Kennedy's assertion, NRA published an article by their magazine's Associate Editor entitled "WHERE THE NRA STANDS ON GUN LEGISLATION" — elaborating at length about NRA's longstanding support for a wide variety of gun controls that included gun and gunowner registration, waiting periods, age restrictions, licenses for carrying a firearm or having a firearm in your vehicle, increased penalties for violating gun laws, regulating ammunition and more.

    Following are several telling quotes from the March 1968 American Rifleman — NRA's premier magazine, then and now — and brief analysis of a few of them. The complete article from which these quotes were taken can be found further below. Scanned images of this article are also linked below.

    First, let's clear up the matter of NRA's support of NFA'34:

    "The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934 which taxes and requires registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles and sawed-off shotguns. ... NRA support of Federal gun legislation did not stop with the earlier Dodd bills. It currently backs several Senate and House bills which, through amendment, would put new teeth into the National and Federal Firearms Acts." —American Rifleman, March 1968, P. 22

    I break here to quote myself from this post almost a year ago in which I prove the veracity of the quote from The American Rifleman made above. Another poster in that thread suggested someone actually buy the issue that's quoted. I thought that was a good idea, so I bought it from an auction site, plus another one from later in the year with more uber-gun-control speak in it. Anyway, here's the scans of P. 22 referenced above:

    So back to Keep and Bear Arms.com's piece:

    The "Dodd" to which the above quote refers is the late Senator Thomas J. Dodd. Senator Dodd mimicked the Nazi Weapons Law of 1938, applied the underlying principles to the Gun Control Act of 1968, and took a leading role in getting the bill signed into federal law.

    "The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol or revolver ammunition..."
    (P. 22)

    The term "interstate commerce" is the BATF's fundamental justification for its firearms branch — a "color of law" excuse for the many assaults of innocent people they've conducted.

    "The NRA supported the original 'Dodd Bill' to amend the Federal Firearms Act in regard to handguns when it was introduced as S.1975 in August, 1963. Among its provisions was the requirement that a purchaser submit a notarized statement to the shipper that he was over 18 and not legally disqualified from possessing a handgun." (P. 22)

    That's one form of registration.

    "In January, 1965, with the continued support of the NRA, Senator Dodd introduced an amended version of his first bill, now designated 5.14 and expanded to cover rifles and shotguns as well as handguns." (P. 22)

    That's an extension of one form of registration to all types of guns not already under registration schemes at the time.

    In order to "put new teeth into the National and Federal Firearms Acts," NRA management also pressed the federal government, in 1968, to:

    "Regulate the movement of handguns in interstate and foreign commerce by:
    "a. requiring a sworn statement, containing certain information, from the purchaser to the seller for the receipt of a handgun in interstate commerce;"

    That's a registration list.

    "b. providing for notification of local police of prospective sales;"

    That's another registration mechanism.

    "c. requiring an additional 7-day waiting period by the seller after receipt of acknowledgement of notification to local police;"

    Wait a week to exercise your inalienable rights.

    "d. prescribing a minimum age of 21 for obtaining a license to sell firearms and increasing the license fees;"

    That is called Age Discrimination. In essence, in 1968, the NRA was saying "You can go die over in Vietnam for your country at age 18, but you can't sell a constitutionally protected item to your own neighbors for three more years."

    "e. providing for written notification by manufacturer or dealer to carrier that a firearm is being shipped in interstate commerce;"

    "Carrier" includes the U.S. Postal Service — another ripe opportunity for the federal government to collect names of gun buyers.

    "f. increasing penalties for violation." (P. 22-23)

    What do you think America's Founders would say about the NRA calling for "increasing penalties for violation" of unconstitutional gun laws?

    At least as early as 1930, the NRA supported:

    "...requir[ing] the purchaser of a pistol to give information about himself which is submitted by the seller to local police authorities..."

    Historically noteworthy is the fact that the Germans were simultaneously doing the same thing, laying the groundwork for a Hitler to happen.


    "...requir[ing] a license to carry a pistol concealed on one's person or in a vehicle..." [emphasis mine]

    Ever heard of a license to carry a firearm in a vehicle? NRA has — over 70 years ago.

    Not only has NRA management long supported gun owner registration, they've worked hard for it and still do. And NRA's current management still supports "penalties" for exercising your rights, which they now call "zero tolerance enforcement". (See Project Exile Condemnation Coalition and the Project Exile Archives for more information.)

    "Many other instances of NRA support for worthwhile gun legislation could be quoted. But these suffice to show that Senator Kennedy's 'terrible indictment' of the NRA is groundless." (P. 23)

    The "terrible indictment" of NRA, as you will see in the full text below, was that NRA didn't support gun control. NRA set that matter straight with a loud thud. NRA Management still to this day supports a wide variety of ever-complex gun controls. And despite taking in hundreds of millions of dollars a year, they've still never managed a Supreme Court court victory based on the Second Amendment's historically-valid "individual right" argument. It's no wonder — their version of the Second Amendment is different than that of America's Founding Fathers.

    Do notice the subtitle of NRA's 1968 article below. A "97-year record" of supporting gun control, to NRA's management, was a matter of pride. Some things never change:

    "We think it's reasonable to support the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act. ... We think it's reasonable to expect full enforcement of federal firearms laws by the federal government. ... That's why we support Project Exile -- the fierce prosecution of federal gun laws...we think it's reasonable because it works. ... We only support what works and our list is proud."

    —NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre
    Congressional Testimony, May 27, 1999
    Hearing Before 106th Congress
    House of Representatives
    Committee On The Judiciary
    Subcommittee On Crime
    First Session

    Oops, now we're all the way up to 1999 with the N R A selling us out for gun free zones and Project Exile.

    So all through the several laws that Dodd and others proposed during the years leading up to the March, 1968 Edition of The American Rifleman, the N R A was using its own voice from the pages of that rag to brag about supporting registration schemes, age limits, prohibitions on interstate sales, people registration through requirements of making one's self known to cop-shops if they own or acquire guns..... and even that is just a partial list. We already know that Dodd had his own copy of NWL38, and evidence supports that he spoke and could read German (discussed at the JPFO link), so even if he didn't have the Nazi law translated yet by the Library of Congress, his inspiration for new American gun control clearly came from that law, and the N R A supported all of it - and bragged about it.

    GCA68 was signed into law by LBJ on October 22, 1968. It passed the House July 24, 1968, and the Senate September 18, 1968. Obviously, debates, in which the N R A participated as witnesses, took place before those votes in Congress took place. In the October, 1968 issue of The American Rifleman, obviously written days or weeks before LBJ's signing ceremony, these things were published:

    Is there any logical way to read that quote, written or uttered sometime after the debates, and likely after the votes in both houses of Congress, and conclude that GCA68 wasn't included in Mr. Orth's expression of support for "workable....gun control legislation" since the N R A's inception?

    I sincerely did not expect this to get so long, nor did I expect to not be done before this time in the evening, but I'm spent and will have to pick this up tomorrow. Sorry, life happens.

    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

  10. #129
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Quote Originally Posted by SirTapparuni View Post
    What would you do? Im curious to know what can be done, and your thoughts.
    They would be looking down the barrel of my .380 that's in my pocket, with my hand on it just in case some tool attempts to grab my primary.
    That's if they are lucky!
    If they are not, they may notice a "larger diameter hole" in their face...AKA, staring down at a larger secondary caliber gun..

    Just sayin.....

    Don't count on just one gun. There is no law (in my state) as to how many guns I can carry on my person and they don't all have to be visible...

    Just sayin.....

    Sent from behind Enemy Lines.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by Firefighterchen View Post
    It is not contradictory, N R A = OC fudd organization. Permit-less open carry...well it goes against " "workable....gun control legislation" since the N R A's inception.

    Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
    That was sorta my point; actually, I was baiting him, you ruined it!


    Having said that, his post does start to touch on the real issue, which I'll get into when I can, it's sorta long.

Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 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