|
Post by hunter480 on Mar 22, 2007 18:09:41 GMT -5
When I was in high school we had school rifle teams. Took our guns and ammo to shool a LOT. Yeah Woody-I`ve read of gangs carrying arms openly back in the 50`s and 60`s and no one in town thought twice about it. They were young men, going directly from school to squirrel or rabbit hunt. Funny thing too-they never were involved in any killings or fire fights.
|
|
|
Post by LawrenceCoBowhunter on Mar 22, 2007 18:10:15 GMT -5
I keep getting this picture of Nazi Germany,and the people not able to defend themselves..like you said,it will be a bad day if they come after my guns..
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Mar 22, 2007 18:17:14 GMT -5
"Wear a gun to someone's house (including God's, or any other place), you're saying "I'll defend this (place) as if it were my own (home)!" ........ Give me a break. Wear a gun to my house and it say's "You are some sort of paranoid whacko who is a threat to to others and more likely to hurt himself or another innocent, than he is to protect anything or anybody". When (others) see you carry a weapon, you're saying "I'll defend you as if you were my own family." .......... No they just think you're nuts, and would prefer to steer clear of you. Anyone who objects levels the deadliest insult possible; "I won't trust you until you render yourself harmless." .......... No, more like "I don't trust you because you're nuts". If you are truly that paranoid, and within the law, concealed carry is fine, but people don't want to see it, and they don't want to hear about it. This bragging, flaunting,and openly brandishing weapons (where they are not needed) does more damage than good to the image of legal gun owners, by a long shot. You are very quick to jump on those who have the opposite point of view as you-and the name calling reveals some anger you have for we who will carry no matter what. You don`t know us-you CAN NOT make any statement as to our mental capacity, nor our likelyhood of injuring someone. It`s fine that you feel so passionately about your position here, and equally fine to make it known that you disagree with our positions, but the attacks aren`t warrented.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Mar 22, 2007 20:07:05 GMT -5
I understand what everyone is saying about Federal Law almost always trumps State Law unless the State is more restrictive ..... BUT, and this is a big but .... even the links that OIS posted references that many states have different rules when it comes to schools. Unless someone posts the actual Federal Law (from a Govt website or scanned document, not a link to a separate site) I am sticking with my opinion that in this case Indiana State Law presides.
I think the point I am really trying to make is once you are tagged with a felony conviction you no longer have the right to carry, use or own a firearm. I am not willing to give up those rights .... apparently some of you are.
|
|
|
Post by Hawkeye on Mar 22, 2007 20:29:01 GMT -5
I have a friend who commits a Felony several times a day if you apply the no firearms within 1000 foot of a school. He lives directly across the street from an elementary school. Has maybe 7 or 8 firearms in his house all the time and carries a Concealed pistol with a permit. I also drive through school zones every day with a concealed weapon and some times a rifle and shotgun. so should we be arrested. sometimes you must go with the spirite of the law as well as intent.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Mar 22, 2007 21:23:15 GMT -5
I understand that .... all my posts are fueled by the idea of "I am going to carry no matter what" mindset.
The school zone thing ... if it is in fact 1000 feet is extreme. But carrying inside a school event ... or carrying in a court room .... or carrying in a Govt Building ..... any place that doesnt have a metal detector is kind of crazy IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Mar 22, 2007 21:56:21 GMT -5
...Unless someone posts the actual Federal Law (from a Govt website or scanned document, not a link to a separate site) I am sticking with my opinion that in this case Indiana State Law presides. I'm starting to feel VERY insulted here. Why would I lie about somthing like this when it is so easy to Google? 18 USC 922 (q)(a)(2) Look it up. Here is a US DOJ / ATF pdf. Look at Pg 2, section V. www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/pdf/quikgid2.pdf Then take a moment to look up the definition of "School Zone" - i.e. 1000 ft. radius from any School. I don't BS about this stuff. No, you have that backwards. You have already given up your Rights by accepoting unjust and illigitamate Laws. WE, on the other hand, realize that thew law IS unjust and is therefore illigitimate. If we are forced by circumstance to demonstrate said violation by defending the lives of innocents... so be it. WE will gladly stand before the Courts and defend the Inalienable Human Right of Self Defense as GAURANTEED by the 2nd Amendment. Failure in the Courts, for the sake of saving an innocent, is a risk we are willing to take. Oh, and BTW, I KNOW I am in 100% compliance in both the letter and Spirit of Federal Law... are you? Try Googling the Militia Act of 1792. It has NEVER been repealed, and has, in fact, been upheld at least once, possibly twice since its incorporation into Federal Law. I am in compliance with BOTH Historical and Statutorily Compliant (i.e. in keeping with Modern Military Equipment) equipment. Are You? Or is that a Law you choose to ignore?
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Mar 23, 2007 8:14:03 GMT -5
Well, we have clarification. I called the ATF office in Indianapolis and the agent I talked to said that the Federal Law was put into place as a blanket and that crossing 1000' boundaries would be no problem ..... just dont step on school property.
OIS .... you might as well get un-insulted. I have not taken any shots at you or anyone else this whole time. I have merely argued my side of the fence. I asked for the actual law and you provided a link to the ATF site that is a "Quick Reference" ... it didnt tell me what I wanted to know so I called and spoke to an agent. Simple.
You started posting in this thread by basically saying the law does not apply to you and you will carry any time you can get away with it .... whether within the law or not.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Mar 23, 2007 8:25:18 GMT -5
How am I supposed to know what you type is true and what isnt?
In your very first post you said you carried in church every Sunday, would definitely carry inside a school and that you carried inside of any Govt. building that didnt have a metal detector.
Which is it ... do you comply (and your original post was a chest pounding farce) or do you not comply (and your latest post was a farce)?
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Mar 23, 2007 8:35:33 GMT -5
Either that or perhaps you are somehow licensed to carry in these areas?
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Mar 23, 2007 12:13:09 GMT -5
swilk, look at it from the practical standpoint. If one has made the decision to carry the majority of the time, then what is required for that person to stay within the legal limits ALL the time?
The answer given to you by the BATF may well have been an honest statement of their interpretation of the law, regarding the 1000' school zone, but how do you know that the eager young cop who stops you for going twenty-five in the twenty zone in front of the school will see it that way? When you pull out your drivers license and he notices the pink piece of paper behind it, he may well ask if you're a CCW license holder, and if so, are you carrying now? Some folks advise volunteering that info anyway anytime you're stopped, while others say it's better to do so only if the stop is going to involve getting out of the car and being patted down. In any case, unless the BATF agent is willing to repeat his statement to you in front of a judge, you may find that "blanket" to be rather uncomfortable during your stay in the graybar hotel at taxpayer expense.
Then there's the problem of removing and safely storing the sidearm during a visit to anyplace where you or Steiny or the legislature may feel is an inappropriate place to carry it on your person. Locking it in the car would seem the only option, but that could well be noticed by any stranger within view, particularly one attuned to watching for the movements normally made by someone stashing their valuables out of sight before leaving their vehicles. You'd be legal to do it that way, but you'd also be much more likely to spend time filling out a theft report, shopping for another gun, explaining to your insurance agent about the smashed side window, and regretting that you have contributed to the guns in the hands of criminals.
Doesn't it seem much more sensible to keep it in your possession the absolute maximum amount of time possible?
The truly concealed carry seems to be the best solution to the problem. I agree that the gun shouldn't be there for all to see, and OIS has repeatedly said the same. Concealed carry means CONCEALED, and should not include sloppy concealment or whipping the weapon out to show any fellow gun fanciers who strike up a conversation with you in the mall or the church parking lot or the PTA meeting, no matter how proud you may be of the weapon.
Many laws, unfortunately, make little or no sense. Check out the legislative process at any given time and you'll see all sorts of nonsensical measures proposed and some will be passed. You may be expecting too much from the government if you expect their regulations to be sensible. I'd like it if we could instill enough respect for the law into our lawmakers so that they would only enact laws that were sensible and enforcable, but that happy day still seems to be far off in the future. They're way to busy sizing up the voters' opinions to see which side of the issues they should be on in order to be re-elected, to take time to figure out which side is actually right.
A better measure of proper actions is probably to realize that all actions carry with them the responsibilty to not do harm, to specific others or to society as a whole, by taking that action. Or, as my grandmother used to say, "what if EVERYBODY acted like you just did?". If everyone who felt the need to do so..... and was willing to accept the responsibility..... were to carry concealed, the country would be a much safer place for all, except predatory criminals and mad dogs. Never forget that those who you really, really don't want to be armed, are armed now anyway, regardless of the laws that prevent the law-abiding from being so armed. The nutcase who wants to shoot up your church meeting, or your school, or your courtroom, will not be deterred from doing so by some silly regulation that prevents you and the other lawful sane people there from being adequately armed to defend yourselves and the other innocents.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Mar 23, 2007 12:31:49 GMT -5
I can agree with your statements 100%.
My point has gotten lost entirely ..... concealed should also include NOT going on Internet forums and bragging how you are right, the law is wrong and you are going to carry any time you feel like it.
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Mar 23, 2007 12:35:35 GMT -5
It doesn't matter to me if you want to carry in those places or not - that's your decision; however I have had the same thought as well as this thread has progressed.
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Mar 23, 2007 13:38:27 GMT -5
Yes, that is a good point.
Kind of another question where a guy is right either way, and wrong either way, I think.
If we can't argue and defend our positions, and try to win support for them, on here, then where? We used to have similar discussions at work, but now that I've retired I find that it's hard to get people to stand in one place and listen to another old grouch give his position statements on everything, unless the alternative is getting back to work 8^).
In some ways it's like the question that comes up every now and then about wearing our cammies out in public. I do, as long as they're not muddy or bloody, if I'm on the way to hunting or on the way home. Seems almost like sneaking around to hide the fact that I'm a hunter if I drive home just to change to jeans and a golf shirt to go get some groceries or pay a couple bills. Just like it would seem like I was ashamed of believing in the second amendment to quietly allow the ideas of those who don't prevail without responding. I'm not at all ashamed of hunting, and don't like acting as if I were, and I feel the same about the freedom to carry. On the other hand, I live in Martinsville. Might have a different view if I lived in Carmel. Maybe the loafers and the Dockers and a Van Heusen for the grocery store? (Ain't gonna happen).
An afternoon shift supervisor I had once at work, who was pretty much a "carry all the time" guy, told me once about forgetting that he was wearing his .45 auto when he hopped out of the truck on the way to work to run into the bank to make a quick deposit. He was just so used to it being there all the time, and his mind was on other things he needed to get done right away. The large gun in plain sight on the belt of the skinny dude drew some attention in the bank. He got lucky in that the guard who approached him was ex-military and not overly excitable. After some ID presentation and some quick explaining, he got away with no problems, but he sure though he'd stepped in something smelly for a while.
In my own case, as I said somewhere above, I'm not carrying all the time, and I'm licensed so that any LEO who might be lurking here and wanted to catch me carrying where it was illegal woul have to tag along behind me for a while waiting for me to go through that school zone or into the bank or whatever, and he'd probably find me unarmed after all his toubles. Or at least that's my story. OIS says he's packing, but both of us may be kidding about what percentage of the time we really are, as a preventative measure against the misuse of the info for the suppression of our civil rights. Politicians aren't the only ones who can lie a little once in a while. 8^)
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 23, 2007 13:56:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Mar 23, 2007 15:03:04 GMT -5
Exactly-
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Mar 23, 2007 15:08:52 GMT -5
Good posts Russ.
And, FWIW, one of the main reasons I post under a Handle is to keep certain things, well, Concealed. ;D
Concealed doesn't mean you can't be found out, just that casual or semi-close scrutiny won't be enough to do the finding out.
However, if I was saying "My Name is Lysander Spooner, and I carry a gun where it is "illegal" to do so, then I would not be "concealing" it any more.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Mar 23, 2007 18:45:16 GMT -5
I find it truly saddening that so many people, even here, have adopted a victim mentality and with it the loss of appreciation for life. Once upon a time, doing what you knew to be right, despite the potential consequences of doing so, was considered the height of nobility. How far we have come.
It is one matter to shrug the personal responsibility of defending ones' self but it is infinitely worse to demand that others do so as well. Those that choose to carry concealed are not only ensuring their own safety but that of everyone else as well.
Even a stranger's life is more valuable than following a law that I know to be wrong. It is as simple as that single inviable tenet.
Those are truly excellent and profound statements.
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Mar 23, 2007 22:43:44 GMT -5
A felon does not buy his guns where you do. He buys his gun the same place your local cocain dealer buys his cocain.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Mar 24, 2007 8:33:48 GMT -5
Once upon a time, doing what you knew to be right, despite the potential consequences of doing so, was considered the height of nobility. I still think so! You are absolutely right on all counts...great and very well written post!
|
|