search instagram arrow-down
Jack Weinstein

Need advice? have a philosophical question or comment?

Explore a topic:

Top Posts & Pages

Enter your email to follow PQED.

Join 3,076 other subscribers

Recent Comments

Jefferson Baugh on Mad Max: Fury Road is a very v…
Jack Russell Weinste… on What is the first question you…
s. wallerstein on What is the first question you…
Jack Russell Weinste… on What is the first question you…
s. wallerstein on What is the first question you…

Click image for the Why? Radio podcast

Why? Radio’s Facebook


No Instagram images were found.

Follow PQED on Twitter

What is Philosophy?


I have removed the original image as requested by its owner. Please keep that in mind when you read the comments people have posted


As most people know, there are activists in Texas who are making a point of going to public places with visible firearms. They have gotten a lot of attention because some chain restaurants and stores have prohibited them from openly carrying their weapons, mostly because it frightens other patrons.

This fear is legitimate. As many have pointed out, there is no way for bystanders to know whether the people with guns are “good guys” or “bad guys.” It is rational to be afraid of someone with a weapon, especially if you know nothing about them.

Furthermore, as Jon Stewart has pointed out better than anyone else, since people are often legally permitted to use guns to protect themselves when they are legitimately afraid for their lives, there is no predicting when someone is going to see the activists and shoot before they ask questions. This will happen. It is just a matter of time. And, in many cases, it will be a legal and rational act. None of us want to be victims of the crossfire.

The questions that concerns me now is how we bystanders should react when people come into a store with guns. There really is no legitimate way of determining intent. Even if the people with guns are carrying a sign claiming to be activists (which they do not do), they could be lying, just setting us all up for slaughter. And since there is no way to know what is on their minds, all we have are our instincts, but as we all should know, our instincts are often racist, classist, and frequently mistaken. So, what should we do?

My proposal is as follows: we should all leave. Immediately. Leave the food on the table in the restaurant. Leave the groceries in the cart, in the aisle. Stop talking or engaging in the exchange. Just leave, unceremoniously, and fast.

But here is the key part: don’t pay. Stopping to pay in the presence of a person with a gun means risking your and your loved ones’ lives; money shouldn’t trump this. It doesn’t matter if you ate the meal. It doesn’t matter if you’ve just received food from the deli counter that can’t be resold. It doesn’t matter if you just got a haircut. Leave. If the business loses money, so be it. They can make the activists pay.

Following this procedure has several advantages. First, it protects people. Second, it forces the businesses to really choose where their loyalties are. If the second amendment is as important as people claim, then people should be willing to pay for it. God knows, free speech is tremendously expensive. If it weren’t, I’d be reading this on ESPN during prime time, not posting this on Blogger.

Third, this proposal has the added advantage of taking the activists seriously. Most gun-rights activists describe a world of tremendous dangers. Guns, they repeatedly tell us, are the only thing between home invasion, rape, murder, and government intrusion. Okay, well if that’s true, then we bystanders should be equally afraid, and react instantaneously to keep away the chaos and the violence. We learned to be afraid from the gun-rights supporters. They have gotten everything they wanted.

Just one final thing. The difficulty of knowing other people’s intent is a classic philosophical problem. It is epistemological in that it involves the limits of our knowledge. We can’t really know what anyone else hopes to do, and sometimes, because of the subconscious and of self-deception, we don’t ever know what our own true intent is. It is also an example of the problem of other minds. We can never really enter into the perspective of any other person, nor can we ever really know what they think (or even if they think). We are discrete individuals and communication is unreliable.

My point: the political and economic realities of running from gun activists is, yet again, founded on classic philosophical issues, and when we take positions on issues of the day, we are really taking positions philosophically. The gun-rights activists think that their intent is obvious and that everyone knows what they hope to do. They believe their minds are transparent. But this is because they are all extreme narcissists. It baffles them that we don’t all know exactly what they are thinking. It shocks them that we don’t know that Jim is a good guy, and that Sally would never murder anyone. But they are wrong. We don’t know them and we don’t know how they think. The only thing that makes us notice them at all is that they have guns and truthfully, that’s why they carry them in the first place. They want to be celebrities, heroes, and the centers of attention.

So, let’s give them what they want. Let’s take them as seriously as possible and run like hell. They’ll feel important and if they really care about gun rights, they won’t mind paying for the hundreds of meals that they inspired the innocent bystanders to leave behind.

(Update: I respond to many of the comments here.)

(Update, 7/25/14: I was going to fix the typo in the fourth paragraph, but that would make Wonkette look bad, and why should I return such kindness by making their post inaccurate? Thanks Wonkette! I am honored by your praise.)

497 comments on “How should people respond to open-carry gun-rights activists?

  1. River Song says:

    I agree completely and thankfully I've never been put in this situation. But it seems the most rational thing to just leave. You aren't trying to take away their right to bear arms but at the same time you're protecting yourself. Because yes, guns are tools used by people to kill other people. And I don't trust strangers.

  2. Amy says:

    Love this idea, as long as the gun holder doesn't take it upon himself to shoot a “dine & dash” group because in their warped minds they are stopping a crime.

    1. Beth says:

      This was also my first thought, especially if the person leaving is a BIPOC and the gun (nut) activist is a racist with a hero complex.

      1. Jack Russell Weinstein says:

        Thank you for the comment. Unfortunately, I have not come up with an equally clever way to respond to sick psychopaths. This is just about open-carry activists. I’ll keep trying, though, if you do as well.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Gun people aren't “warped”.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Agreed that open carry demos feel uncomfortable but they usually target businesses as public theater for a political reason. If you can only respond by stealing from the business you are (1) missing the message that gun owners are not second-class citizens to be discriminated against (2) helping reinforce a corporate policy of discrimination that you might not tolerate if it was targeting some other category of person.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Advocate stealing because you are intolerant. Sounds legit.

  6. sneele says:

    If you bring your gun into a restaurant or theater, I am leaving because I don't know whether you are dangerous or not.

  7. sneele says:

    Who is intolerant? Leave your gun home. Locked up. You don't seem to want to tolerate my safety from you.

  8. Zoe says:

    I'm *pretty sure* you're the one missing the message.

    Gun owners are not, currently, second-class citizens. This proposal seeks to make open-carry gun activitists into second-class citizens, and I hope it succeeds.

  9. Zoe says:

    Statistics would argue that your statement is incorrect.

  10. Anonymous says:

    No, actually, they propose that YOU pay for my meal. I am NOT intolerant, I have the RIGHT to feel safe in a restaurant, store, or theater. One of the few reasons to feel good about living in PA is that, even though we also have open carry gun laws, any business can deny service and remove people who are openly carrying a fire arm (as a person who has worked retail in the past – I love the fact that I could be SAFE in my workplace — that someone UNKNOWN to me would not shoot me, or rob the business that employs me and writes my paycheck).

  11. Anonymous says:

    Statistics historically and numerically A) inherently cannot formulate argument, a type of mathematics is not opinion forming, but more importantly, B) statistics are always able to be interpreted to support any argument by modifying the information input into the calculation. Essentially, you just said nothing at all.

    I must point here to the accepted reality that claiming most anything as infinitely true is highly improbable. The author loses credibility by a) advocating for criminal behavior (you can leave without paying, but are still criminally liable even though you may have been in fear) and b) by making unsupported universal claims about all or even a large subset of gun owners. Probabilities analysis would not support your chances of that being an accurate statement.

    Now, as a psychology professional, I must also point out that every single person in america is able to be classified with a psychiatric diagnosis under the DSM IV. Does that make people warped, or the same?

    Does any strong viewpoint without factual statistical analysis of multiple aspects including peer review and repeatability merit being a fact? If you can't prove it, or disprove it, then is it true?

    Im a gun owner and I have open carried, but I do not prefer to. I'm an open holster protestor, but prefer to keep my sidearm concealed. That is my choice. It is true through the lens of history however, that a right not exercised is a right lost.

    Truly, let's ask this. You see a person in uniform wearing a gun and you don't run away, but you know you can buy police uniforms at Goodwill, uniform suppliers like Blumenthal's, and online. You assume because they look like cops they are good guys, but what if they are just using the uniform as camouflage? Do you run away from all people with guns, or just the ones that didn't reach you via 911?

    You see, in the eyes of the constitution, the law, and most people, you assess risk based on feeling and the actions of others. It is your responsibility to hone that instinct, but you live fallaciously if you believe that seeing is always believing and that the world is inherently safe.

    Truthfully, believing the world is safe and acting that way is why predators succeed in finding victims readily, and why more people fall down from height and die every single year, than die from gun violence (you can fact check that at and the FBI ucr)

  12. Anonymous says:

    I walk down a sidewalk every day trusting that the guy driving down the street isn't going to turn his steering wheel and run me over with 2 tons of steel.

    You guys are all just talking about FEELING safe. You are no less safe with someone open carrying in that restaurant than you are with someone concealed carrying in that restaurant. But you don't FEEL safe because you just don't feel comfortable around guns and I think that is part of what these guys are trying to d.

    The problem is that these guys think they are engaging in exposure therapy when they are actually engaging in shock therapy. So they get a negative reaction from people who have an irrational fear of guns.

  13. one other thing I would like to point out. While it may make you uneasy when you first see someone open carrying. Keep in mind telling that person who is not doing anything wrong they are not allowed in a store or restaurant has happened before and it was ruled discrimination by the Supreme Court. You can I hope figure this one out, but just in case For decades we had Good people who did nothing wrong refused services in our country based on a misguided belief that they were some how dirty or less than human.

    They could not sleep in hotels for fear we would then catch something from sleeping in the same beds, They could not eat in the same rooms or restaurants either, use the same bathrooms. As a result they were treated as second class citizens in their own country. Yes some Whites thought all black men would come in the stores and rape the nice white lady in the corner like the bull ape they were right? that by eating or drinking with the same cups and plates you would catch that nasty set of diseases that all blacks had to have right? oh lets not forget that you did not want them playing with your kids or learning together either. So for your feeling of safety, the fear you might be caught in a gun battle between crazies with guns trying to kill you and a citizen taking the right to protect them and there loved ones into their own hands lets go back to the decades of discrimination it is the right thing to do. After all what does it matter if a person is not doing anything wrong. if you feel bad with them near you they should be forced to get out of your sight!!! That is what this article and the OP is actually telling us to do. I will not bend to anyone's fear-mongering to push their political agenda. I sure am not going to teach my children to break the law. I hope none of you will either.

    1. Anna says:

      Im sorry what? Did you think that was a clever argument? That owning a gun is the same thing as being black?

  14. After reading what precedes, am I glad I live in Canada where all I have to fear is being run over by 2 tons of steel. I believe : 1. Hunting guns ONLY should be permitted – what does one need other guns for?… 2. They should be locked up with ammo and firing pin or any other part making it functional in other locations. Anyone carrying a gun openly in my mind is simply acting as a bully / intimidation – being a teacher, this is one thing I work hard against in my work environment. We don't let kids in school behave in this way, why should adults do as such? My name is Jean-Jacques Reigneau and I live in Chicoutimi, Québec, Canada. I am not anonymous. It will show up as my wife's name for some reason I ignore but it is not her writing.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Gun nuts are so afraid of facts, they got the CDC banned from studying gun violence for 17 years. (I'm pro-gun, anti-nut)
    The “argument” that because you can't disprove a crazy theory (that every cop is actually a criminal in a stolen/bought uniform), you shouldn't worry about things that are obviously threatening, is just stupid.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Or a RATIONAL fear of nuts w/guns.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Distrusting nuts w/guns is NOTHING like racism (& no, everyone reading this did NOT have the same racist feelings you express).

  18. Anonymous says:

    We know that “gun people” aren't warped. Silly, it's those stupid guns that are warped!! They keep killing people.

  19. Anonymous says:

    This isn't about “gun owners”. I own guns. This is about irresponsible activity with firearms. If I see you walk into a restaurant with a firearm I'm not going worry about the food or the bill, I'm going to take you out.

  20. Anonymous says:

    I was reading with interest until your example with police imposters.
    How many mass shootings have been perpetuated by officer imposters? How many have been carried out by a bad regular dressed guy with a gun?
    How does the civilian tell the difference?

    I've watched open carry protestors bully and intimidate with their weapons. I've seen them chase down bystanders, harass people who disagree with them.

    When pressed for who exhibits sane behavior it is not the company you keep.

    If I saw an armed group walk into a place I was, I would leave immediately. Yes, I would in theory break the law before bullets fly.

    You see, the possibility of bullets flying was seriously decreased when no one carried arms with clips into public places.

    I wouldn't have my family anywhere near you because, like the author said, I don't know you or what your mindset is.

  21. Anonymous says:

    Can a car KILL 40 people in less and a couple minutes? Can you drive one into a dark theatre or sandwich shop and take out 20 people?

    No. The fear is not irrational. Irrational is not looking at places that have 40 times fewer deaths and strong gun control laws. Why aren't we emulating what works?

  22. Anonymous says:

    If they are doing so legally the best thing to do is go on with your business & leave them alone.

  23. Anonymous says:

    If would think businesses could firearms on their premisees as.they can restrict smoking and chainsaws. Perhaps a supreme court case will eventually result and a slightly more progressive and rational bench will implement the well maintained militia clause as intended.

  24. Anonymous says:

    Normally I wouldn't dignify this logical fallacy with a response but here's the fundamental differences. 1. A person's skin color doesn't inherently make them dangerous. A weapon capable of killing 40 people in a second does. 2. You can't get around racism by leaving your skin color at home. A gun owner can get around this supposed “discrimination” by leaving their weapon at home. I do not know why this is so difficult to grasp.

  25. Anonymous says:

    Gun people are nuts.

  26. Anonymous says:

    Irrational fear of guns, in restaurants, in Texas? Do you think the 43 people shot in Luby's restaurant in Killeen Texas in 1991 a man with a gun would have left if they'd had the chance? Would they have been irrational? Should they have worried about stiffing the house for the price of a cheeseburger if they'd had a chance to get out alive?
    Of course not.
    If I'm ever in a restaurant, or coffee shop, or convenience store, when either one person or many people walk in with those rifles strapped across their chests and their fingers on the trigger-guard like the woman in the picture, you'd best believe I'm going to leave. Instantly. Without paying, without saying “sorry”, without attempting to discuss anything with the gun-wielders or the store staff. Just Gone Daddy Gone without looking back, and if someone wants to put me in jail for it so much the better. I'll take it to court, and the media, and anyone else who'll listen.
    There's a mass-shooting every WEEK in this country, and if you think I'm going to worry about the correctness of walking out on my bill when somebody walks in carrying rifles, you're as crazy and stupid as everyone says you are.

  27. Anonymous says:

    Why start something, if it is legal leave them along & go about you business?

  28. Anonymous says:

    Can a car KILL 40 people in less and a couple minutes? Can you drive one into a dark theatre or sandwich shop and take out 20 people? “
    Yes, and its happened. Not all the time, and I dont want to sound ignorant, but its happened to sandwich shops, bike races, parades, etc. I'm against the open carry folks with the rifles wandering Walmart or your local Applebee's. But I'm against it for the reasons stated above- its shock therapy and is going to end badly.
    What I really despise is how both sides on this are black and white. “Gun nuts are illogical”, “anti gunners are whiners”…Both sides speak in absolutes. I carry concealed, occassionally as dictated by MY feeling of safety, depending on where I'm going to be at what time due to my job. This is probably less than 5% of the time. Does that make me illogical, carrying in an area where it is proven by the type and regularity of violence by non-law abiding citizens happens?
    “Gun Nuts are so afraid of facts they got the CDC banned from studying gun violence for 17 years”
    Aźtge CDC has no stellar record on good studies, just look at thr AIDS outbreak in the 80s for that.And anti-gun nuts have used skewed figures and rigged tests for decades (the experiment with the college classroom shooter where the “bad guy” always knew exactly who the armed “student” was and where they were seated) show both sides are wrong in how they portray the other.
    Maybe I'm one of the small minority that thinks there can be a happy medium, that I can legally own a gun and am willing to jump through hoops and piles of paperwork and background checks to get one. But when, and only when, Feinstein, Clinton and Bloomberg guarantee me that there will be NO more shooting deaths, that gun violence will disappear completely if I turn mine in will I consider it. In over 3decades of ownership, Ive never aimed at another person or considered pulling my weapon. I dont own “assault weapons”. I'm not illogical. But Diane Feinsteins own personal security team had applied for permits to carry full auto weapons, machine guns, and most likely were approved. Doesnt that reek of hypocrisy?

  29. Anonymous says:

    statistics show that gun owners are far more likely to be killed with a gun than none gun owners. Guns at home more often than not cause a loved one's death via accident or domestic arguments. The instances of protecting one's self with a gun from a criminal or home invader is practically nill. The justification to own a gun for protection isn't supported by facts.

  30. Anonymous says:

    Dammit, NO ONE wants you to turn in your weapon. That isn't what Bloomberg or Feinstein or any of the gun extremists' bogeymen support. Universal background checks. Close the online and gun show loopholes. Store your guns locked safely away from children and teens. No open carry in retail establishments which 99 times out of 100 is done by people with little or no training with inferiority complexes and chips on their shoulders. Exactly who I'd feel unsafe around. We are not anti-gun. We are anti idiots with guns – I.e., these people. Normal gun owners don't feel the need to go waving their private parts – er, rifles – in other people's faces.

  31. Anonymous says:

    With various cases regarding stand your ground and whatnot and these morons walked into a restaurant I was in…if i actually felt my life or my family's was threatened, I could pull my concealed firearm and shoot every single one of them with little or no legal retribution.

    How would i be able to understand the difference between a responsible gun owner with an assault rifle coming into the place of business that I'm in and the guy who is about to go on a homicidal rampage? “Oh! You can tell! They're being responsible!”

    Yeah that makes sense. These idiots will keep doing their demonstrations until someone puts a bullet in one of their skulls.

  32. Anonymous says:

    Merci bien/ Thank you.

  33. I am glad to know about this.

  34. You need to educate yourself on when a gun may be drawn. People skipping out on a bill is not a life threatening situation. He or she will not do anything. People lawfully carrying a firearm aren't police and do not think of themselves as police. Your description would lead to charges being brought against the gun owner.

    Of course there are all the crimes you've committed such as theft when you run out on the bill. Odds are the gun owner will simply pay his or her bill. I guess it's you that will be standing in front of a judge.

  35. “This isn't about “gun owners”. I own guns. This is about irresponsible activity with firearms. If I see you walk into a restaurant with a firearm I'm not going worry about the food or the bill, I'm going to take you out.”

    And you have just committed a crime. Now as to “Taking out the person carrying” how are you going to do that? Pull your own gun and just open fire? Stab them with a knife? When the police start questioning you, they will ask what led you to think you were at risk. Was the person you “took out” brandishing the firearm? Was he or she pointing it at you? No? It was slung over their shoulder? Say hello to your new buddy, Rocky who thinks you have “A purty mouth.”

  36. Anonymous says:

    If the gun-carrier tries to retain the “dine-n-dasher,” then that person should immediately call 911 to report a kidnapping/ hostage-taking attempt. People are supposed to try to escape when a person carrying a weapon enters the area.

  37. Progressive, ie, totalitarian.
    Now a few things. Whether or not a business can request that you leave the store or leave your gun outside, (Locked in your car for instances), varies from state to state.
    As to the second amendment that you are misconstruing, they said what they meant. They intended that the People have the means, if required, to remove a government that has gone out of control. Care to guess the last time this happened?

    1946 in Athens Tennessee. Google it.

    Then we have the state of New Hampshire which has in it's constitution, Article 10:

    [Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

    Think about when the Second amendment was written. We had just rebelled against the lawful authority of King George the 3rd. They knew that it was possible, even likely that the need for the people to remove by force, the sitting government might happen again. (Preferred method is the ballot)

  38. That so called statistic has been proven wrong many times. twice in the last year within several blocks of where I live in fact.

  39. Bowie Ibarra says:

    I would do the same with cops. They're murdering more Anerican's than these gun nuts.

  40. Nohbody says: suggests, Anon@10:30am, that you need to pay more attention to those who hold the political views you apparently support and what they actually say. Not only do those who oppose private firearm ownership say that owners should turn in their weapons, but that they should be confiscated, and the owners should give up basic rights like the 4th Amendment (regarding search and seizure) or the right to privacy (as per various US Supreme Court rulings).

  41. Now, for a reality check on open carry of long guns. (Rifles and shotguns) While it mat be legal to do so, it isn't something I would do for several reasons. Those reasons are:

    Rifles are awkward. Unless you have gone through the checks for what is called an SBR, (Short Barreled Rifle), and paid the tax, you are carrying something that is 2+ feet in length.

    This rifle will weigh in at around 8 pounds or more.

    You will probably have it slung crosswise over you shoulder and across your back. If the need to use it in a lawful shooting, such as stopping someone from committing murder, you are going to have to unsling it, bring it to your shoulder and draw a bead on the criminal in question.
    This will take several seconds at best.

    Then you are going to have to check what is behind the criminal. Why?

    You are carrying a rifle that is loaded with high velocity cartridges that WILL go though the criminal, and probably the wall behind the criminal. If you have to shoot, you are also responsible for where those bullets go.

    Now someone who is carrying a pistol is generally carrying something that weighs in at 2 pounds or less. It may be concealed or in an open carry holster on that person's belt. The cartridges are probably hollowpoints designed to minimize the chances of going through the criminal.

    If a person has to use a pistol in a lawful shooting, they will have it out and aimed in 1-2 seconds. (Responsible gun carriers practice this and think about what they will do if forced to by the situation) That person will also be cognizant of of what is behind the criminal, but won't be worried about the bullet going into the next county.

    And here a are a few statistics on lawful shootings. When a police officer is forced to fire, he or she has a tendency to empty the magazine. (Up to 18 shots depending on the gun) They are also more likely to hit an innocent bystander. (See some of the NYPD shootings of late)
    The citizens average about 2 shots fired and both rounds hit the criminal, NOT bystanders. Remember, the citizen is liable for where those bullets end up.

    There are several reasons for the above stats. First, citizens tend to go to the range and practice a lot more then police officers. It isn't uncommon for some officers to only fire 100-200 practice rounds a year. Your average citizen gun owner is probably firing that a week. Practice makes perfect.

    Finally, citizens who carry never want to draw their guns. The claim that gun owners are “Looking to shoot people” is laughable. A gun owner who is lawfully carrying only wants to draw his gun to put it away or to shoot paper targets, (And the occasional watermelon) While they are prepared to defend themselves and others, including all the victim wannabes here, not one of them wants to be in that position. They have just accepted the responsibility you have chosen to forgo.

    Being willing to protect themselves, their families and others from evil doers.

  42. Nohbody says:

    Totally independent of the issue of privately owned firearms and the public bearing of same, as someone who has worked retail for much of his employed history, I have to thank you for suggesting that people just leave their stuff lying out and walk off.

    No, really. I soooooo enjoyed having to put entire shopping carts full of goods back on the shelves because some dingbat didn't pay attention to the location of their wallet or checkbook, instead of doing things like, say, the job I was hired to do.

    On the other hand, I'd kinda not mind being the proverbial fly on the wall when someone walks out of a restaurant without having paid for their food, which depending on the specific circumstances could get counted as theft, simply because of their hoplophobia.

    (Alright, so I did kind of dip into gun politics a bit. So sue me. 😛 )

  43. tracker says:

    @ angrywebmaster

    Cops have pulled weapons on people who've committed NO crime, ranging from carving a piece of wood with a legal knife, to being deaf. There's no reason to think these people would be any different.

  44. tracker says:

    If I see a person in a uniform with a gun out, I will leave if at all possible.

  45. tracker says:

    Being black is not the same as voluntarily carrying a lethal weapon. If you can't tell the difference, then I'd say you really ARE twisted.

  46. tracker says:

    Since we're declaring what the founders intended, they INTENDED that the people be armed in place of a standing army. They INTENDED that there BE no army, or navy to speak of, just citizens as part of a WELL REGULATED militia.

    They intended that every citizen be equipped with the most high-tech firearms available at the time – single-shot muzzle loaders.

    They intended to REGULATE the ownership of those firearms, and keep track of what people were doing with them.

    They did NOT intend for people to own a single weapon capable of killing fifty people before reloading was necessary.

    They did NOT intend for people to be dragging around loaded cannons with lit tapers wherever they went.

    Open carry is not the same as “non-resistance”, unless you're actively planning on shooting cops who stop you.

    Think about when the Second Amendment was written. We had no standing army. We had just rebelled against the lawful authority of King George the 3rd, largely because France helped us, and because England didn't care enough to commit their full military power to holding on to the American colonies.

    They knew that we didn't have a standing army of any kind, and that we had lost the protection, such as it was, of the British Empire.

    They knew that we were in the process of taking large amounts of land from the people who were living here when the colonies arrived, and they were perfectly willing to kill people to defend themselves.

    They knew that there was no standing law enforcement or system of defense against criminals, against native Americans, or against any other possible aggressor.

    They knew that the most lethal weapon that could be carried at the time was a rifle that had to be reloaded after every bullet fired, and that was only slightly better than a bow.

    And yes, they thought that perhaps the government would need to be overthrown, and they knew that the government had exactly the same weapons as the civilian population.

    Your description is so simplistic as to be idiotic.

  47. Anonymous says:

    true you have not reason to think of the gun carrying people as bad. there is also no evidence they are good either. be it right or wrong for a cop to pull a gun on a deaf person or a person with a pocket knife, my point is these aren't cops carrying assault rifles its citizens. (untrained John Q Public) who you have never met and don't know anything about. The news gives us tons of evidence that people coming into places with assault weapons don't usually want to protect themselves they more often start shooting.

  48. Anonymous says:

    PERHAPS STARTING WITH ALL CAPS MIGHT GET THE SLOW WITTED AMONG YOU TO PAY ATTENTION. you can not kill someone for whatever reason and just walk away. you will always be changed. i think that self defense is a wonderful reason to shoot someone, but i repeat, you will not be the same again ever. if you are at the wrong end of a gun or the mercy of someone has killed before, you will changed then too. by all means defend yourselves, your families and children, it is the right thing to do. but the remains of a bloody mess are are still a mess and people will be heartbroken and some will never heal. so please don't blather on about philosophy etc life is infinitely valuable and while i would kill a bad person to save a good person, i know this too- THE DESTRUCTION OF ANYONE IS A LOSS TO EVERYONE..

  49. Anonymous says:


  50. Anonymous says:

    The author of this article is transparently dull and the attempt at being philosophical weak at best.why would the gun people pay for the sheeple that fled?baaaaa baaaaa

  51. Anonymous says:

    Funny how the antis are concerned about “safety” when they risk innocent lives by cresting the shooting galleries known as gun free zones.

  52. Anonymous says:

    Only the ignorant are scared of inanimate objects, even if cars kill 30,000+ people in the US every year, but here are some FACTS:
    You are 367% more likely to be killed in a car than by any firearm in the US, and your chances of being murdered in the US are about .0028% WAY MORE LIKELY, so don't commit crimes.
    “Low end estimates cited by Hemenway show approximately 55,000-80,000 such uses each year.”
    “Middle estimates have estimated approximately 1 million DGU incidents in the United States.[1]:65[6] The basis for the studies, the National Self-Defense Survey and the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), vary in their methods, time-frames covered, and questions asked.”

  53. Anonymous says:

    Ignorance is bliss.

  54. bravo33 says:

    Some of the things this article suggests are illegal. These crimes could get people arrested, land them in court, paying hefty fines or worse jail.
    An irrational fear of others engaged in a lawful activity is not a criminal defense. I fear the author of this story suffers from Joe Biden syndrome, which would be giving advice which results in criminal conduct.

  55. Anonymous says:

    What are these guns that kill 40-50 people per second? You would be hard pressed to kill half of that with a Minigun even if they stood in a line

  56. Anonymous says:

    Sad Day when Americans dont trust each other. All of you narcissistic people are ruining our country. Add in oppressed immigrants that see firearms as a means to control others and gun owners become threats instead of fellow Americans.

    All of you need to get your head out of your asses on both sides. This is America and we don't put up with nonsense be it homegrown or foreign.

  57. Anonymous says:

    Right, and when a car plows through a restaurant, you run the fuck away in the opposite direction in a similar manner in which the author describes when idiot “activists” with an AR-15 waltzes in. You

  58. Anonymous says:

    Interesting. What part of the Constitution deals with your feelings?

  59. Anonymous says:

    If an armed group entered a restaurant, I would leave. I would call the restaurant later and pay for my food over the phone. Problem solved.

  60. LJA says:

    The obvious reason why we fear guns but not cars:

    Cars are not designed to kill. They only cause harm when misused. Guns are designed to cause harm. Especially when used properly.

  61. Anonymous says:


    do this when police come in with guns, too! After all, you can't determine their intent either, can you?

  62. Anonymous says:

    You my friend are one misguided puppy

  63. Anonymous says:

    Looking at the “responses” I see this nation has been dumbed down miserably and neutered as well. Breeding cowards and misfits. Liberalism is a cancer in this country that needs to be cut out

  64. Nohbody says:

    Unless you have a previous agreement (written in particular, “he/she said” rarely bears legal scrutiny) with the manager of the restaurant, that's still illegal.

    But by all means, feel free to try to justify to the judge your felonious actions with unwarranted paranoia and hoplophobia. Given the loads on many courts, I'm sure they could use the laugh.

  65. Anonymous says:

    I would treat people openly holding a gun in the same manner as I'd treat people openly holding their penis. By leaving.

  66. “Dammit, NO ONE wants you to turn in your weapon. That isn't what Bloomberg or Feinstein or any of the gun extremists' bogeymen support. Universal background checks. Close the online and gun show loopholes. Store your guns locked safely away from children and teens. No open carry in retail establishments ….”

    So we can have guns but not access to them? Seems legit…quit nambypambying and just come out and say that you do not trust a fellow upstanding citizen with a gun that isn't working for the government, but don't insult us with some mealy-mouthed acquiescence to our constitutional right to own and carry firearms. Just be plain-spoken about your intent and your fear.

  67. Anonymous says:

    LJA… with BILLIONS of rounds of ammunition shot in this country every year and 7 thousand murders with firearms, the idea that firearms are only for killing is idiotic at best. By far there are more targets, cans and water melons shot in this country every year then people. I shot over 100,000 rounds last year in competitions and not one round came close to hitting anyone let alone killing them. Please if you wish to have an argument against something, come up with a viable argument and not some straw argument you pulled from your hind quarters.

  68. Anonymous says:

    100% of people who quote percentages are liars.

  69. Anonymous says:

    Great way to deal with this phenomenon if you're a person who is frightened by such a situation.
    Now, how do you feel about cops with guns?

  70. Anonymous says:

    ^It's comments like “Liberalism is a cancer in this country that needs to be cut out” that make me wonder how someone with my belief system could possibly feel safe having people like you carrying firearms…

  71. Anonymous says:

    The realing coward is the person with the gun. I am not afraid to walk around with one.

  72. Uhlbelk says:

    Anon, those “surveys” on defensive gun use, claim that approximately 300k homicides are prevented each year from defensive gun use. The ACTUAL number of homicides is 15k. If those numbers sound reasonably accurate to you, then you are a FN idiot with no capacity for rational thought, and talking to you is pointless.

  73. Anonymous says:

    Perfect solution, walk out, pay later. I was going to post if no one thought of that solution. Sure carry your gun out in the open, loaded and ready to go. I'll find somewhere else to be as you've obviously assessed a dangerous situation at the burger king and decided to come locked and loaded. I'll call them back, pay for my whopper later and never go back again. If you feel the need to have your gun out waving it in my face I'm sorry if I'm less than trusting of your peaceful nature.

  74. Anonymous says:

    Seriously. It's simple and much less likely to end in puddles of bodily fluids.

  75. This dine & dash theory is implausible. You can't use food stamps at McDonald's.

  76. Anonymous says:

    If a psychologist walked into a public place of business with an AK-47 openly displayed, I would shoot to kill, thinking I was in “Ft. Hood revisited.” Most open carry advocates, like psychologists, have major issues.

  77. Tell you what, I'm a U.S. Army Veteran. I served in Iraq on multiple deployments. I've seen people blow themselves up in a crowd. You people are so asinine. Go live in Africa or South America and tell me about violence, where people are dragged from their homes and executed because they're Christian, where dozens of people are kidnapped, women for sex, men to kill. A british soldier had his head cut off in the street while people watched. So many of you are simply dazed and confused, while others try to reason with them. I have carried concealed for 10 years, in and out of the Army, I go into banks, I brought it to school, I wear my firearm 90% of the time I'm awake. I swore an oath, that doesn't just go away because I don't wear the uniform anymore. Demonstrators who open carry rifles at Chili's and Chipotle are making themselves look foolish, while bringing negative attention to themselves. I don't ever let people know I'm carrying, and that's my choice. The reason they open carry in restaurants is because they're attention whores. The people who are really trying to change the laws write their Senators, sign petitions and don't bring negative attention to the cause. For the people who don't like guns, don't want guns in our society, and don't want me to carry guns, there's open seats on flights to England, Germany, and Australia daily. Additionally, don't look at me to interject or save you or your your family if someone tries to kill you or them. It always comes down to that choice, you don't want to be responsible to protect yourself or your family, you want someone else to do it, a cop right? I've been to combat, I shoot more, and am more proficient with firearms than most Police officers. If I could stop someone like Adam Lanza, James Holmes, or any other mass shooter, I would try. However, if I knew you were a piece of shit that supports gun control, and calls firearms owners “gun nuts”, I wouldn't piss in your mouth if your teeth were on fire.

    To end this rant, and to sum up what I believe is the deciding philosophy of this debate: Scared people are going to be scared. Stupid people are going to be stupid. Senseless people will be senseless. Debate will never change any of these people, or their views, because the people themselves are flawed. I have a right to protect myself and my family, you don't get to tell me when, how, or in what manner I'm “allowed” to do so. For the people who call firearms owners pussies or gun nuts, I'll do me, you do you. Hopefully you never need my help or defense, because I wouldn't piss in your mouth if your teeth were on fire.

  78. Anonymous says:

    He was joking. He said that people who quote percentage are liars. He quoted a percentage. Therefore…
    Yeah there lies the joke

  79. Anonymous says:

    Anonymous is correct that people are far more likely to killed by cars and many other things than they are by a gun. Which is why the treasonous radical pro gun activists can't use the argument that we all should be allowed to carry guns because we need them for self defense.

  80. Anonymous says:

    Brievick in Finland… One of the most lethal mass killer of all time.
    An I agree, if a group of armed people enter a place, even if they're the good guys, what if a bad guy comes next or someone they mistake for a bad guy?) ? I wouldn't want to be in the middle of that.

  81. Anonymous says:

    Ignorance is the bliss of the uninformed. When you see someone you don't know carrying a gun, you say you will leave. Yet, when a person wearing a Law Enforcement uniform walks in with his handguns, rifle, whatever, it is fine? Have people ever once considered that the person in uniform is NOT an officer? Simply playing into the perception of what a “safe” society would have you believe. Take your own safety upon yourself, but do not let fear of an inanimate object rule your life. If you do, I do not know how you would walk out of your safety bubble in the morning. Cars do not drive drunk, knives to not plunge themselves into people, guns do not pull the trigger. There is a person involved in those things.

  82. Anonymous says:

    No one with a good and clear mind would do this sort of this so, YES, I will certainly do this if ever in this situation. I will also be screaming “Help POLICE!! Gun, gun, gun, person with a GUN!!!” because it IS against the law to create a public panic which they are doing!!

  83. Anonymous says:

    The laws of every state prohibit you from intentionally putting me in fear of my physical safety. It”s called assault and it's a crime.

  84. PS – you absolutely SHOULD leave a place when you're scared. I've been a Soldier for almost 28 years and I still leave a place that makes me uneasy.

    But I go back and pay when the fear has passed. If you don't, you're just a different kind of asshole from the mouth-breathing attention whores with guns. You're just using the false claim of “I was scared” to justify NEVER GOING BACK TO PAY YOUR BILL. And that makes you an asshole.

  85. So, just to be clear, the author believes that the most appropriate response to irritating assholes who are flaunting their LEGAL right to carry firearms in businesses who LEGALLY support that right, is to ILLEGALLY steal goods and services?

    I agree that these mouth-breathing nut-jobs shouldn't be allowed near things they could hurt themselves and others with, but they are still not breaking the law. Nor are the businesses who allow the slack-jawed idiots in. The only people breaking the law in this article will be the people who leave without paying for the goods and services they acquired. And THAT will get THEM thrown in jail.

    PS – “This will happen. It is just a matter of time.” is just as much fear-mongering as the dreaded gun-toters are accused of waging. It assumes that such a high percentage of gun owners have zero discipline and self-control that a LAGO-on-LAGO (law-abiding gun owner) massacre is inevitable. And that just is not the case. The number of legal gun owners is so high and the incidence of a legal gun owner shooting “the wrong person” is so extremely rare, that when it DOES happen it makes national news.

    You are absolutely justified in fearing something dangerous you don't understand. You are absolutely justified in doing whatever you can to avoid danger. You are NOT justified in any way when you break the law under the guise of said fear as a way to “make them pay” and force your own agenda onto law abiding businesses who are legally supporting something you disagree with.

  86. Anonymous says:

    Angrywebmaster–you just don't get it, do you? It's the NUT-JOB holding the gun that I'm afraid of. Specifically, it's WHITE people holding guns that I'm afraid of. White people hopped up on their ill-conceived superiority like a drug. Who will stop other people carrying to try and force them into an ID-check. This happened in Georgia very recently. And to be detained by someone for any reason at gunpoint, who is not in law enforcement, is not just a hostage attempt, it's terrorism.

  87. Anonymous says:

    you read the article right? getting one's self and family away from a potential mass shooting is just silly compared to you doing the work you get paid to do. and interestingly, if armed and feeling threatened, I can literally shoot and kill one of these losers and not only not go to jail, but make use of money from organizations set up to fund this in my legal defence … but I can go to jail for not paying $20 bucks for a partially eaten meal when we flee. Murica!!!!!

  88. Anonymous says:

    the gun people will not pay. accepting the consequences of their actions is not one of their strong suits. the restaurant will lose money (and if everyone leaves, could be a fair amount). The restaurant is unlikely to recoup their losses. If one can kill someone when threatened (stand your ground), one can certainly flee _without_ killing anyone. Said restaurant will then bar these losers from entering again. Everyone wins.

  89. Anonymous says:

    you miss the point. most people think avoiding a mass killing is worth a misdemeanor or two. any state with stand your ground will have a hard time allowing someone in fear to kill another human, but hold people accountable for the price of a meal if they flee a potential mass shooting. it is a media circus waiting to happen.

  90. Anonymous says:

    Nohbody … seriously. Any court that convicted innocent parents of protecting their children by not paying the price of a meal given the potential of a mass shooting will bring on national ridicule. No one will go to jail. Many will donate to help cover a fine while embarrassing the the stupid state legislature the whole time.

  91. Anonymous says:

    whoa dude. you started out making sense and then went full crazy. i'd get that looked at. ignoring your predilection for pissing in people's mouths, you do realize there is a broad continuum on the subject of gun control. As far as flights available elsewhere, what makes you think you arent the one who should leave. Not just your country bro. here is the problem, you come across as mentally unhinged and heavily armed. historically not a good combination. I too am a veteran, but apparently I defended all americans not just the crazy ones. as one vet to another, seriously, get help.

  92. Anonymous says:

    of course your anecdotal evidence overrides large statistical studies which is why no one listens to you.

  93. Anonymous says:

    i think you confuse the fact that you (apparently) being a knowledgeable and skilled owner of a gun somehow implies that all these other carrying civilians are just like you. Seems like a large amount of unsupportable assumptions and therefore not likely true. frankly i care less about their marksmanship and more about their mental makeup. the people screaming the loudest on every forum about their right to wave these weapons (which they thill in detailing number and capacity) in our faces do not come across as mentally balanced or competent. Knowing they practice every day (is that so they can hit the bad guy without endangering bystanders or so they can pick off every little kindergartners head) does not really help your point.

  94. Anonymous says:

    I don't fear the inanimate object. I fear the person walking into restaurant or store, who is carrying the inanimate object that just happens to be really good at killing people.

  95. Anonymous says:

    That wasn't racist at all….. ever heard of civil arrest. That is where a citizen detains a criminal caught in the act until police arrive.

  96. mantan says:

    Wow Eagle Club Eric. Tell me, is there any reason why minorities can't be law abiding gun owners? You have some ill conceived idea that the Second Amendment only applies to White Guys, which you're sadly mistaken. Tell me….what is preventing a minority from legally obtaining a gun at a gun store? What's stopping them from exercising their Second Amendment Right to bear arms? Your mentality that its a white only thing reenforces the idea that minorities don't have that same right, which they do, its just that they fail to exercise it like whites do. If you want to get down to statistics: Do you feel more trustworthy with gangs that use guns in their gang warfare or individual criminals that use guns daily in their crimes against innocent people? What is it about the white man who exercises a constitutional right that scares you? Christ Almighty, people today are absolutely ignorant sheeple when it comes to their rights…..

  97. Unknown says:

    Uhhhhh — good luck with that rationale. I live in New York, which — for now anyway — doesn't have these psychos open carrying. Were someone to walk in Jean Georges with visible weaponry, you bet your ass I would hightail it in a cab back downtown in a flash. You can call it bigotry, and you can call it whatever you want. I'm GONE.

  98. Unknown says:

    I'm so freaked out by humans… WTF…

  99. Anonymous says:

    “However, if I knew you were a piece of shit that supports gun control, and calls firearms owners “gun nuts”, I wouldn't piss in your mouth if your teeth were on fire.”

    . . . because you don't believe in the First Amendment?

  100. ModernLeper says:

    I support the second amendment. I am a legal gun owner. That said, I wouldn't even think about openly carrying a firearm into a restaurant or retail establishment. Aside from the obvious safety issues and the likelihood that it would instill fear in others- points that have already been discussed at length by others, there's another issue – one of common decency and decorum. I would go to church dressed only in a jock strap, just as I wouldn't open carry. It's about having respect for my fellow citizens. Even if you have the rigjt to do something, it doesn't mean you should. These open carry folks are just asinine, and need to grow up.

  101. Anonymous says:

    Shoot them…. erm…

  102. Anonymous says:

    As a shooting range monitor, the people in the above picture are handling their firearms in a very irresponsible manner. Unless you are in “the box”, a firearm should never have a magazine in place and the bolt closed. If people want to claim they are responsible gun owners, they need to behave as such. If any of these people showed up at our firing range, they would be turned away because they have already demonstrated unsafe firearm handling.

  103. Anonymous says:

    Well said. And look at Canada's gun fatalities vs the U.S. in 2013 were 173 to the U.S. 9,146.

  104. Anonymous says:

    See, I can post anonymous too… Because I fear standing behind my bullshit opinions. It's that easy.

  105. Anonymous says:

    Yes, clearly your argument is logical and reasoned.In a time of mass shootings in public spaces it is ridiculous to react to inbreeds with guns strutting around with their shame on display. (see small penis) You know what you are doing, you know why you do it, you can't even begin to justify it and when a child is killed as a result you will be to blame. You are everything wrong with our society.

  106. Anonymous says:

    I do not fear inanimate object. I don't fear idiots with guns..but I don't choose to hang around them either. Kind of like I don't choose to play Russian roulette. With idiots and guns its always the same. Sooner or later one of them is going to show his ass.

  107. Anonymous says:

    There is no way to know if someone is a nutbag open carrying or a nutbag with intent to kill–you are one in the same. The reason you are open carrying a weapon is so that you are ready to kill someone. Therefore you are a terrorist, end of story.

  108. Anonymous says:

    If a person walks into a restaurant, sits down to eat, and slowly pulls their steak knife from their napkin do you get up and leave? Statistically more people are stabbed yearly than shot in America. As for the fake policeman statement it is just pointing out that anyone can be dangerous. Do not live in fear of what might happen because the more you fear something the more likely your subconscious is going to make it happen or you will waste your life running from it. Be prepared for eventualities and possibilities. As for the uniformed gun toting policeman, police shoot and kill more people each year than non police. But the police killings are “justifiable homicides” so they are not reported to the public as much. Since 9 11 there have been more americans killed in the U.S. by police than there have been in Iraq.

  109. Anonymous says:

    The car vs gun deaths argument is absurd because those stats are not normalized for exposure. We all encounter hundreds, maybe thousands, of cars per day. However, we see maybe one gun per week (month?) on average. Part of why fewer people are killed by guns is because they are rare. Clearly my chances of dying by gun are exactly 0 if I removeyself from every situation that involves guns.

    Using stats like the cars vs guns example without normalizing for exposure to guide your decision about exposure is moronic. How many people die per year due to their blood boiling in the vacuum of space? Not many because most of us don't go to space. So if I were to go to space tomorrow without a space suit, would it be any consolation that it's rare to die that way? Not even a little.

  110. Anonymous says:

    One of these days I'd like to organize my own little event in a open-carry-legal state. I'd get a group of friends and we'd go to some public place and hang out, openly carrying the following totally legal and commonly available items:

    1. Baseball bat.
    2. Sledgehammer.
    3. Scythe.
    4. Jug of muriatic acid.
    5. Chainsaw.
    6. Can of gasoline.
    7. Log chain.
    8. Axe.
    9. Propane torch.
    10. Cattle prod.
    11. Length of steel pipe.
    12. Tire iron.

    When asked to disperse, we'd point out that the gun people can carry their legal items around without being harassed. We should be able to also.

  111. Anonymous says:

    Unless you've been on the wrong end of a gun, you have no idea what gun violence is like.

  112. Anonymous says:

    Anonymous: the only thing guns were built to do it kill. They were not built for target practice and then someone suddenly decided that they should be for killing. They were designed for war as an advantage in hand to hand combat over swords and other hand held weapons. The sole purpose of a gun is to kill. You can argue all you want. It is ignorant to think they are for anything else. Just because YOU shoot targets does not mean their intended use is anything else.

  113. Anonymous says:

    Guns are for pussies, everyone knows this.

  114. DogKiller says:

    just ignore them. There is 0 evidence they are dangerous. I agree that they are attention whores, but at the same time I'm not seeing the streets run red with blood, nor are they breaking any laws. people over-reacting or suggesting anyone else do the same are the ones with a problem and irrational fears, because no facts back up their behavior.

  115. Anonymous says:

    “But here is the key part: don’t pay. Stopping to pay in the presence of a [ni***r] means risking your and your loved ones’ lives; money shouldn’t trump this. It doesn’t matter if you ate the meal. It doesn’t matter if you’ve just received food from the deli counter that can’t be resold. It doesn’t matter if you just got a haircut. Leave. If the business loses money, so be it. They can make the [ni***rs] pay.

    Following this procedure has several advantages. First, it protects people from black criminals. Second, it forces the businesses to really choose where their loyalties are. If [ending segregation] is as important as people claim, then people should be willing to pay for it. God knows, free speech is tremendously expensive. If it weren’t, I’d be reading this on ESPN during prime time, not posting this on Blogger.”

    That's what your column really says. That's the sentiment and the bigotry and the deliberate misinterpretation and outright hostile and wilful ignorance on display here. Gun rights are civil rights. To us you look like a charicature of a 1950s segregationist up in arms over black people moving into your neightborhood, because of your idiotic misconceptions and false perception of danger.

    Unless you don't think they're a “real” civil right. The KKK used to say that about the right of blacks to vote too.

  116. Anonymous says:

    Yes, there is an excellent reason why minorities “can't be law abiding gun owners”.

    The reason is quite simple: If they walk into a public place carrying a weapon, in most areas of the country, they will most likely be shot.

  117. Anonymous says:

    Why would one compare gun deaths to car deaths in a restaurant?

    Personally I don't make it a point to picnic on the highway.

    Are there more car deaths that happen to people when they're sitting in restaurants than gun deaths?

    I find it hard to believe that there are that many vehicular homicides inside eating establishments, but I guess the numbers don't lie…

  118. Anonymous says:

    “The laws of every state prohibit you from intentionally putting me in fear of my physical safety.”

    This is subjective and it's bullshit. Stop watching Law & Order.

    “It's called assault”

    It's not, actually.

    “and it's a crime”

    0 for 3. Keep at it. Surely this shows you're educated enough to talk about this subject.

  119. Anonymous says:

    I agree with gun nuts being turned away from business establishments!

    Why, every time I see a black man, I hold my baby in fear that he might rob me or commit a crime. Statistically, black males are more likely to commit a crime than anyone else. Are you saying that I should continue being afraid?! That I don't have a RIGHT to feel safe? GET BLACK MEN AND GUNS OUT OF OUR ESTABLISHMENTS! WE HAVE A RIGHT TO FEEL SAFE!

  120. VermontK says:

    So you think comparing African-Americans to people carrying assault rifles makes you a logical wizard, and not a racist making a sophist argument, anonymous at 6:15 p.m. Well, when I see a person of any ethnicity in a store, I think there's a person. When I see a person of any ethnicity in a store openly displaying a lethal weapon, I am logically fearful for my freaking life, whether or not an ambiguous Second Amendment exists or not. Spare me your racist claptrap.

  121. Anonymous says:

    “How would i be able to understand the difference between a responsible gun owner with an assault rifle coming into the place of business that I'm in and the guy who is about to go on a homicidal rampage? “Oh! You can tell! They're being responsible!”
    If you shot someone because you “felt” threatened by a gun carrying person, expect to serve jail time. Conceal Carry isn't an open license to target shoot people because you disagree with them or their Constitutional right to carry. Most Stand Your Ground laws make it clear that your life must be in danger. Someone open carrying a gun isn't a threat or a situation in which your life is in danger.

    Get real!

  122. Anonymous says:

    Crying wolf isn't creating public panic? Because that sounds exactly like what you're trying to do.

  123. Anonymous says:

    Anyone who has intent to kill or mass kill isn't going to show up in a group of people with guns pretending to be law abiding. You won't have time to leave and steal your dinner or haircut. They will walk in as discreetly as possible and open fire. Or they will come in with guns already blazing.
    And the gun will most likely not be legal, or it will be owned by someone else and not kept secure.
    And then you will wish there was someone open carrying nearby and they won't be, because your silly protests got them banned. Whoops.

  124. Anonymous says:

    I'm always amused by the people who compare gun deaths to car deaths as if it proves guns ought to be freely available.

    Let's apply the same standards to guns that we apply to cars: tax them, register them, require users to be licensed, require users to pass written and practical exams, require users to carry liability insurance with proof of insurance and identification whenever they have a gun in their possession. And make the gun owner responsible for any non-legitimate injury that occurs due to the use of his gun.

    Then guns and cars will be on equal footing.

  125. Anonymous says:

    It seems that the reason that the open carry advocates are using an utterly tackles and provocative display is because they think they are countering the notion that someone wants to take their guns away. I suppose there are a few who advocate the idea of banning all guns, and though that is a naive position to hold I think it is usually borne from an optimism about human potential and a disgust at the mechanism of what guns are and what they do. There heart is in the right place and for the pro gun people to perceive them as somehow hostile is myopic and demonstrative of their own inability to have some compassion. I think. I think it is entirely reasonable to allow responsible and reasonable adults the right to own and use guns, I would call into question, however just how reasonable and responsible a person is who feels the need to pull such immature and childish stunts as walk into stores with lots of weapons. It is also pointless, because there is next to no real support for the idea of taking everyone's guns away. no one with any say so is advocating that. I think the notion of every walking around with openly brandished weapons is absurd and will undoubtedly lead to trouble. if i was in a story with my child and a bunch of people came in with guns, i would instantly suspect and fear the worst. I would hide, and I would wait for a chance to strike them n the back of the head with whatever weapon I could find and I would call the police. In a modern and civilized world we do not need everyone running around with guns everywhere. I wonder very much about the other political and societal views of these open carry advocates. once they are on every street corner with guns what is to stop them from wanting to take over, or defend themselves against, oh i don't know, the homosexual menace, or the illegal immigrants. I think the whole notion of what these guys want is rude and idiotic. This is not the wild west. Take your guns home and put them away. you can get them out if you need them. Like if someone tries to teach you science or something.

  126. Anonymous says:

    If there were no guns, there would be no death by gun.

  127. Anonymous says:

    My “subconscious is going to make it happen”? Just like with rape, right? The problem isn't lax gun regulation, or the gun nuts, or for that matter the guy who said she was just “asking for it” — it's those poor fools who can't control their subconscious thoughts. Now I get it!

  128. Anonymous says:

    Um, it's illegal to drive a car into a restaurant. And nobody in their right would do it, just like nobody in their right mind would carry an assault rifle into a restaurant. I'm not ok with being anywhere near mentally unstable people with guns, especially automatic and semi automatic weapons, and if you're carrying one into a restaurant, it's pretty obvious that you have some serious mental/emotional instability. Or you just have a painfully small penis.

  129. Anonymous says:

    Please leave my store/restaurant without paying for items you have consumed. I'll be more than glad to press charges for theft. It would be you who are breaking the law. Are these Open Carriers dangerous? No! Are they breaking any laws? Again, NO….. They law protects their rights, just like you have the right to your Free Speech. Advocating to not pay, is advocating Theft….Just keep that in mind….

  130. Anonymous says:

    Wow, very well spoken.. Straight from the heart, no facts just feelings, nothing more than feelings.

  131. Anonymous says:

    Simple solution…..move out of texas! problem solved! your welcome!

  132. Anonymous says:

    Hey, dickwad gun owners. I own several guns. Concealed carry is the law in my state. I see some asshat sauntering in with an AR-15 over their shoulder and a look of manic glee on their face — like most of the idiots with this martyr complex that they're going to be the one to prove that our rights are somehow diminished when the public wants to be safe — first, I'm going to call the police, inform them there's an armed individual in the locale, and that I will defend myself.

    With stand your ground laws, you have to fear for your life. If this moron was carrying a shovel, bat, car keys, diagram for a tree house, swimming pool, axe, or chainsaw, I might be in trouble. But no, this idiot will be carrying a deadly weapon. I'll be within my rights to shoot them, because fools who try to provoke this kind of fear response deserve getting shot. Not by police, or federal agents (like their sociopathic martyr-based dreams hope they will be) but by me — an overweight gamer with a gun and no time for bullshit like parading around like a soldier.

    And to the subnormal asking 'why do you let a cop wander in with a gun exposed?' Because, idiot, I know that they've been trained to the bare minimum of competency, and are going to be held to the law if something happens with that gun.

  133. Kegan Pierce says:

    How you feel is pointless. Here's a little out of the box thinking: When a person with a firearm comes in, there are two possibilities. A: They want to eat. B: They want to shoot the hell out of everyone. Now then, at this point, you either walk away, or have the manager kick the person out to make you feel “safe”, or nothing is done. Several possibilities: 1: You just stole food, as you didn't pay but the gun owner ate, payed, and left peacefully. Your bigotry is appreciated, have fun in court. 2: You leave, guy shoots up the store, now the store has bigger problems. You still stole. But you're alive, gratz. 3: Store owner attempts to throw the person out. He… A) Walks out, as he has no criminal intent but respects the store owner, but in the end, a law abiding citizen was denied entry into a public place and was denied a service rendered by a private company because of FEAR. (I hesitate to bring up the black civil rights thing, but… while obviously black people and gun holders are different, history should make it clear that deciding civil rights disputes based on fear is a bad idea.) B) Isn't told by the manager to leave and it turns out they're here to shoot the store up so they do.

    Now let's consider these options. Which one is the best outcome? The one where you don't leave and pay, and allow the gun owner to eat, which is MOST LIKELY what they want to do. And look at it again. Real long and hard. Consider you this: There's a store. I have a gun. I want to shoot it up. Oh look they won't let me in. Do I give a fuck? Hell no I'm about to commit a crime!

    Anti-gun laws don't save people… People who commit crimes using fire arms won't follow your gun laws, but what the gun laws WILL do is turn society into a place where people with no criminal intent are discriminated against and feared because of a vast minority of people, and all the while criminals will STILL kill people, and they will STILL use guns. And knives. And cars. And crowbars. Chainsaws. A shoe. A toy. What an item was made for doesn't matter when it is used with criminal intent. the idea that anyone with a gun is bad because guns were made for war is stupid… yeah, they're great at killing people. People are a WHOLE lot better at killing each other.

    Fear shouldn't decide laws. Specifically, YOUR fear shouldn't decide where a specific demographic is allowed to go purely because you have an unfounded fear of them. An unfounded fear is a fear without evidence to base it off. This person, who you've never met, will most likely not kill you. You don't know their criminal history or their intentions. No evidence is provided to indicate they want to kill people. But you assume they will and so decide to deny them something you are provided based NOT on an arrest-able/detain-able offense, but because you're afraid of them for holding a gun…

  134. Anonymous says:

    Driving is a privilege. We have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms. It is the second amendment for a reason, could have easily been the first. The framers felt very strongly on free speech and self preservation.

    It's a good thing this gang of hoplaphobes weren't tasked with the revolution to start this great country, we would still be singing God save the queen.

    Sadly, I think somehow that would be OK with this ilk. Happy Independence Day patriots! Keep your powder dry!

  135. Anonymous says:

    In the period, the definition of “REGULATED” was “trained and equipped”.

    Hence in common parlance today, the literal translation would be “A well trained and equipped Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  136. Anonymous says:

    Guns should be worn by law enforcement in uniform only. End of story.

  137. Anonymous says:

    Here's my take away from all of this, for what it's worth and perhaps an overly simplified perspective: Boobs

  138. Anonymous says:

    Anonymous gun-nut is full of it. No one is afraid of inanimate objects. That's a very silly position. They are afraid of whackos with guns.

  139. Jim says:

    Hilarious, you mean you can't tell the difference between a person ordering a latte and a bagel who just happens to be carrying a firearm from the thug who runs in and starts shooting the place up like the Rubys restaurant in Texas? Or the thug who runs up to you on the street and puts a knife to your throat?

  140. Anonymous says:

    The likelyhood of drowning in your backyard increases infinitely when you put a pool in your back yard

  141. Anonymous says:

    How do we would we know that someone open-carrying a firearm is a law abiding citizen, or someone about to engage in murder? What kind of signals should let us know if the person carrying the firearm is friend or foe?

  142. Jim says:

    Which is why the police and military carry them? Because they are pussies? The secret service have guns because they are pussies? The guards who transport money are pussies? Is that right? The thousands of families who share the tradition of hunting are all pussies as well as the young girls and boys on the local high school rifle team? I suppose Kim Rhodes, the 17 year old girl who won the gold medal in the 1996 Olympic Games for shotgun, she's a pussy too?

    Brilliant, absolutely brilliant. Clearly we need more minds like you.

  143. Anonymous says:

    In a country where the mass slaughter of people minding their own business is common place, this is the only logical thing to do. I'd rather explain to a judge why I skipped out paying a bill then explain to my offspring why their Mom is dead.

  144. Jim says:

    Millions of citizens have concealed carry permit and carry every day. You just don't see them because the firearm is concealed. 43 state have “shall issue” laws. You are literally surrounded by guns everyday without incident. Armed with this knowledge are you planning on just running into stores and yelling ” police! Gun! Ahhhh” and the hide under the table? You make no sense. There are certainly some nuts out there who have guns but owning a gun doesn't make you a nut.

  145. Anonymous says:

    The second amendment gives you the right to be murdered by someone using a firearm.

  146. Anonymous says:

    Kegan, you are right on the money, brother.

    No silly Gun Free Zone sign will ever stop a murderer.

    Also, I've never seen n instance, when a person, that looked liked common OCer all of a sudden gone nuts and started shooting people. Not a sinhle one. I'd agree, though, that rifle OC was never a mainstream, but if it's it just strapped behing the back, then what is there to worry about? Now, morons walking into establishments with their rifles low ready is slightly different story. I'm not sure I'm in position to judge anyone, that would considered them an imminent threat and act accordingly.

  147. Jim says:

    Well, if the person who just happens to be carrying a firearm is walking down the aisle of a store with a shopping cart shopping or joking with their friend as they order caramel macchiatos minding their own business, you should as well. If someone comes into the store waving a gun or other weapon around and starts shooting then you have a problem.

    What people don't understand about the whole carry issue is that millions of people legally carry concealed every day. 43 States have “shall issue” carry laws. There are people around you every day carrying and you don't even realize it. Most of those people are good guys who follow the law, get the permit and background check and exercise their freedom to keep and bear arms.

    The few bad people are not going to be standing around in Starbucks with lattes and AR15s discussing he recent Game of Thrones episode.

  148. Their tactics are failing but their goal is noble. The reason for what they are doing is to protest the law that forbids open carry of handguns. Police are abusing the law against open carrying of handguns. It you show even the smallest part of your handgun you are arrested and charged with open carry. That carries a long prison sentence. You will most likely offered a deal of a small fine. However you will then be blocked from ever owning a gun ever again for the rest of you life. You will never be allowed to own a gun, shoot a gun even at the range and you will have to give up all the guns you currently have.
    Try to reach something up high in a store and the tip of the gun is seen and you do lose your guns, forever. So, yes they are fighting for something noble. This is real science, this is facts. Something gun owners understand.

  149. Anonymous says:

    So what if guns are “designed to kill”? So were knives, historically. In fact, edged weapons have killed more people over the course of history than any gun ever has. Yet I (and many others) carry folding jack knives, box-cutters, and multi-tools to our workplace every day. How many times have you went to a warehouse/ industrial building and saw an employee with a boxcutter (a.k.a deadly blade meant for killing)? Did you feel threatened then? No? That's because that knife, at least in your eyes, serves said worker a useful purpose. Sure, it can be used to kill someone else, but it is highly unlikely. Same as my target rifles. So what if historically, they were “designed to kill”. But they don't. My target rifles, handguns, and hunting rifles are never going to shoot a person, never even hit NEAR a person, ever. That's the way it is, that's the way it's always gonna be. As well, on a side note, I love how when the pro-gun populace brings facts to the table, anti-gunners call said progunners “unreasonable” and “irrational”, and when the progunners ask why, the antigunners call them extremists. About that…

  150. Jim says:

    by these people. They are simply carrying long guns to argue the point that they want open carry for handguns, which many states already have. If som crazy person wants to run into a restaurant and start shooting they are going to do it and you have no control over the situation (unless you are armed of course) a bunch of goobers exercising a legal right to carry long guns while they grocery shop or order coffees is not a sufficient reason for you to commit a crime.

  151. Anonymous says:

    I wish people would stop giving any gun owner who doesn't share their exact beliefs the blanket statement “gun nut”. Few, if any pro-gun people here are calling anti-gunners names and blanket statements. Yet every time a pro-gun person attempts to bring facts to the table, everyone just says, “go away gun-nut”. Now I know there are a few legit crazy people out there who own guns, but since when does the minority outweigh the majority? Because there are a few crazy anti-gunners out there, should all us pro-gun people start using offensive blanket statements to describe you? No, because not every anti-gunner is like that. I own guns. Does that make me a gun nut? It's time to stop the name-calling and insults, and bring actual facts on to the table. A few pro-gun people have already tried, only to get told that they “just aren't seeing the big picture”, “you're being irrational/ unreasonable”, and even worse, stuff like “shot any innocent civilians yet, gun nut?”. You call gun owners extremists, yet you are acting just as extreme, if in fact more extreme, then them. Grow up, people.

  152. Anonymous says:

    Ok so if you start running away and don't pay for what you've received when someone comes in with a gun and the owner of the establishment looses their nut what are the chances one of those idiot open carriers will start shooting. Seriously, you're the bad guy at that point in their feeble minds. Think. Cause they aren't!

  153. Jim says:

    There are already background checks in place. In order to by a regulated firearm fom a dealer you must go through the background check. That include pistols. It is possible for a citizen to sell a gun to another citizen but the seller can not be conducting business (I.e. selling multiple guns) there is no evidence (despite what nanny Bloomberg says, that these firearms are used in any crimes.

    Criminals on the other hand simply go down to the dealer on the street and buy what they want from the black market. No background check needed.

  154. Anonymous says:

    To add on to my previous statement, how many people have knifes in your kitchen? Do they just fly out of your drawers and stab people? Do you ever get urges to kill when you're chopping vegetables? Do you feel like murdering innocent civilians when you slice a steak? No? Now you know how us responsible gun owners feel.

  155. cabers says:

    Perfect example of voluntary self-delusion from the progressives. You convince yourselves that you are in real danger so that the idea of getting a free meal is not only your entitlement but your only option. At least be honest about your intent here. This is clearly a twisted form of entitled protest. It is twisted because of its leveraged attack on a uninvolved third party (people own these restaurants/businesses by the way.) and it is so clearly a protest because fear is not the motivator here. If it was you wouldn't need to be told to rally in this fashion- it would be instinctual. You are trying to oppose their lawful right to carry and you are getting a free meal by doing so. You are disguising your contempt and selfish response as self preservation.

  156. Anonymous says:

    Just a bunch of fags who want to steal their food and then justify it with a self righteous backward logic. Please, if you see a gun and it scares you, just leave… and kill yourself.

  157. Anonymous says:

    I find it extremely ironic and idiotic that gun protesters are choosing the most damaging method of protest to their cause. People like me who are middle of the road about guns, believe in background checks, yet feel people should be able to own guns if they want, are pretty repulsed by this behavior. I usually assume that people who own guns are generally responsible and understand when and where it is appropriate to have them out, regardless of laws. There is such a thing as etiquette. For instance, it is legal to pass gas and hang snot from your nose at a restaurant, but if a group of people walk in doing it on purpose, it is idiotic behavior that will not win support and sympathy from people like me who support the second amendment, but expect responsibility on the part of the owner. If I invite people to a party and tell them to bring friends, I don't want their friends walking in with AR-15's just because they are protesting. I don't want any kind of protests, be they liberal or conservative when I go to buy groceries or to a restaurant. I don't want anti-abortion activists or pro choice activists walking around Target as I do my shopping. I don't want a group of people with AR-15's OR anti-gun protesters with posters of murdered people walking around when I eat out. I am using my hard earned money to relax and get a meal away from the incessant political bickering or stresses of life, and I expect to pay for my meal, relax, not shove my politics in any other diners face, and expect the same for myself. The stupidity is that these protests are out of place, and turning off a lot of people who generally support people's rights to bear arms.

    Also, imagine if 10 armed protesters who do not know each other are at Wal-Mart and one lone gun men comes in and starts shooting. What next?
    Let's say these protesters are in different aisles and all pull there weapons. When one turns a corner and sees another with a gun, both of them in a defensive position, you think they are going to magically know they are the good guys? No, you'll have 10 people shooting at each other thinking that other is a criminal. Then what happens when police arrive? There is a reason why we have Police. Easily identifiable, organized so they all know who is on there team.

    So yes, you have a right to bear arms. But you do not have a right to start making believe that you are to be citizen police every time you go to get baby wipes or a burger.

  158. Anonymous says:

    Officially the dumbest article ever written and we are all dumber for having read it!!!!

  159. Anonymous says:

    nothing says law abiding citizen like dine-and-dash

  160. Anonymous says:

    leaving a place without paying for the meal is a crime of theft of goods / services

  161. Anonymous says:

    yes: nothing says “i'm a law abiding citizen” like advocating criminal activity, such as not paying for goods and services you have received.

    not only do you wish to deny people their rights, you're willing to break the law to do so…

    the open carry people aren't the threat to society: people like you are.

  162. Anonymous says:

    The argument about cars killing more people…. just goes to show there are real idiots in this world. Mindless.

  163. Anonymous says:

    Wouldn't it be great if anonymous was just one person having a very intense argument with themselves.

  164. Exactly.. Can't wait to hear their excuse in court..

  165. Anonymous says:

    This is just an excuse for you leftists to get free shit. If you're against this, then why don't you protest in a way that's…..I duno…maybe LEGAL?!

  166. Anonymous says:

    So, you want to ban guns, and call gun owners lawless, yet here in your own words, you are recommending theft. “Just leave. Don't pay. It don't matter if…” Typical liberal mindset.

  167. Ronnie A says:

    Actually, if you're screaming about a guy who is legally carrying a gun but not threatening anyone with it, YOU are the person who is creating a public panic.

  168. Ronnie A says:

    I could feel brain cells dying as I read this. What a ridiculous thing to suggest that people should do. “Oh, yes officer, I saw a guy with a gun and I felt icky, so I decided to walk out without paying my 100.00 restaurant bill. Also, I'm making a political statement, so please make the guy who was legally carrying a gun pay my bill for me.” Yeah, good luck with that.

    But with that said, I have never understood the need to carry openly. I think it's like painting a target on my back. I carry concealed, because I don't want ANYONE, good guys or bad guys) to know that I am armed. Regardless of whether I think it SHOULD make people nervous, the fact is that it DOES make people nervous. I don't want to be responsible for that. I just think it's rude.

  169. Anonymous says:

    Leave without paying for your meal? That is retail theft a misdemeanor in most jurisdictions. Very good advice, steal snuff when you are fearful. I'm afraid that the moon will fall on me so I'll steal a new Aston Martin. Yeah, that works.

  170. Ronnie A says:

    So you talk about “civilized” society, and yet you say if you saw someone carrying a gun you would hit them in the back of the head and call the police? Seriously? And what would you say when the police got there? “Yes, officer, that guy was carrying a gun, and even though he wasn't threatening anyone with it, I decided to knock him unconscious.” And do you know what that officer's next words would be? “Put your hands behind your back. You are under arrest for felonious assault.” The main reason that these open carry pinheads are going out of their way to flaunt their weapons is because of pinheads on the other side of the argument (like you, for instance) who write and say absolute asinine things like you wrote here.

  171. Anonymous says:

    Zoe, your intent to make gun owners second class citizens is deplorable. How dare you take away a person's rights? I would never wish any rights bestowed upon you by our Constitution to be with held from you. You just spoke what the true intent of Moms Demand Action is and you have lost all of my respect.I was supporting MDA up to this point and now that you have admitted that your real intent is to make a group of Americans second class citizens is digusting and your organization has lost my support. You Zoe are the one all Americans should fear, not the gun owners but the tyrant who wants to take away an American's rights and make them a second class citizen. i screen shoted your admission and have posted it in as many places as I can. Above all else I support America and its Constitution.

  172. SteveB says:



    1. Intentionally putting another person in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. No intent to cause physical injury needs to exist, and no physical injury needs to result. So defined in tort law and the criminal statutes of some states.

    2. With the intent to cause physical injury, making another person reasonably apprehend an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Essentially, an attempted battery. So defined in the criminal statutes of some states.

    3. With the intent to cause physical injury, actually causing such injury to another person. Essentially, the same as a battery. So defined in the criminal statutes of some states, and so understood in popular usage.

    Anonymous @ 8:13pm, it looks like you owe someone an apology.

    Assault, defined | LII / Legal Information Institute | Cornell University

  173. SteveB says:

    And your evidence that that was the only definition of “regulated” in use at the time would be?

  174. Anonymous says:

    How about instead of running away you just call them a FN idiot and keep eating your meal. They want a reason to use it. Let them prove they are that idiot.

  175. SteveB says:

    Jim, do you have factual evidence to support those claims? They seem to contradict factual information I've previously read.

  176. SteveB says:

    You spend a lot of time thinking about “fags.” Why do you think that is?

  177. SteveB says:

    It's known as the defense of necessity, and it's been a part of legal practice for centuries.

  178. SteveB says:

    Theft is a crime of intent. I don't believe you could establish intent beyond a reasonable doubt if a person were truthfully frightened by the group of armed men who suddenly appeared in the restaurant.

  179. Anonymous says:

    You Americans are fucking retarded.

  180. Anonymous says:

    Leaving a restaurant after you have received your food and have eaten even dome of it with out paying is stealing. Makes one thief.

  181. Anonymous says:

    Y'all are fucking stupid

  182. GeekTinker says:

    So many Anonymous posters in this thread. If you can't at least take the time to create a fake online persona, why even take the time to type out a response?

  183. GeekTinker says:

    I couldn't agree more. I feel as though the article, combined with most of the comments here have lowered my IQ.

  184. GeekTinker says:

    According to your logic, there should never be any protests because you don't want your little world shattered. Boo hoo! Just because you have income to spend doesn't guarantee you anything short of what you pay for at the store or restaurant. Apparently, in addition to ignoring the 2nd amendment, you'd like to eliminate all freedom of speech as well. Good luck trying to rewrite those parts of the Constitution during your lifetime.

    Your hypothetical situation is full of faulty logic and ridiculous assumptions as well. Here's a couple of scenarios you forgot to cover during your rant: 1) The lone gun “men” (wth?) starts to walk up to the business and sees armed people out and about and decides today isn't his day and this isn't the place to shoot people because there are people here who will shoot back. 2) The lone gun “men” (wth?) starts shooting and is nearly immediately taken out by one of the others with a firearm.
    Just because a person is armed in public doesn't make them blubbering idiot. If you honestly “…usually assume that people who own guns are generally responsible”, then why can't you logically assume that a person who is armed in public knows how and when to use their firearm? Most likely, they know how and when to use it better than most police officers who are responding.

  185. GeekTinker says:

    If you honestly aren't able to figure this out with the power of observance during a few seconds, then seek professional help.
    The quick answer is, you don't. However, an armed society is a polite society.
    Here is a hint: A person about to engage in attempted murder will likely be hiding their weapon until they are using it. You won't realize they have it until it's too late.
    A person open-carrying a firearm is a law abiding citizen where open carry is legal.

  186. GeekTinker says:

    And people intent on killing others would still find a way to accomplish that task, perhaps with something even more deadly.

  187. GeekTinker says:

    “there is next to no real support for the idea of taking everyone's guns away. no one with any say so is advocating that.” – You obviously aren't paying attention to current events and the types of bills that are being proposed in Congress by liberal politicians nearly every year.
    What the protesters are doing is called open carry. They are not “walking around with openly brandished weapons” as you stated above. Brandishing any weapon is something different entirely than open carry and will usually get almost anyone who does it arrested fairly quickly.

  188. Anonymous says:

    Why do pro gun idiots always reference car deaths in defense of their gun rights? Deaths from cars are an unwanted side effect from their use and car manufacturer engineers are working tirelessly towards making them safer. Where as gun manufacturers are working tirelessly towards making them more efficient killing machines. That's what they are, killing machines, you're defending your right to kill other humans.

  189. Anonymous says:

    The guy who wrote this and all who agree are dumbfucks

  190. Anonymous says:

    hey anonymous- post your name meat- don't hide behind the keyboard. Coming off on some rant and can't even say ya name mate

  191. Anonymous says:

    I have a friend who is a police officer and he has said it best. If he ever has to respond to a “shooting” call, the reality is this. Anyone not in uniform with a firearm being brandished is a legitimate target. I have to agree because how are the police supposed to know who the good person or the bad person is.

    And although the honest citizen in Las Vegas a month ago was trying to do the right thing by stopping a man who had just executed two police officers, that upstanding citizen was executed by the shooters wife because the honest citizen had no idea there were multiple shooters.

    And on a final note remember this. Even if you are justified in shooting an attacker, the FACT of the matter is this. If the bullet goes through soft tissue, exits the attacker and strikes an innocent bystander, then no matter how you slice it or dice it, you are 100% criminally and civilly accountable for the harm your bullet causes. That's right, if you shoot an attacker but the bullet goes through the attacker and strikes an innocent bystander you are prosecuted and after the State is done prosecuting your behind the victim or the family of the victim may then sue you for everything you have.

    Just a reality check.

  192. Just leave without paying and get arrested for theft… that's a really smart thing to do and sets such a great example.

  193. I agree with how to respond. Get up and leave.
    BUT, I will add, my only issue, is that some businesses might already disagree with the ammosexuals and not want it in their place. They just haven't had them deal their childish gun waving crap in their place, and are hoping they wouldn't have to in their restaurant or store (pay for your store stuff though lol.) And express to management/employees that you feel you and your family's lives are endangered. A mob of gun wielding people that could be potentially dangerous with violent criminal pasts, who may have no problem attacking or shooting a person if they get angry or frustrated, only to claim they “felt threatened” and shot an unarmed citizen.
    The fact that they feel the need to be about wielding weapons in a place it's not needed, knowing that it puts fear into decent people, is a sign that they get off on terror tactic intimidation on peaceful citizens. To gamble that they wouldn't attack as a mob or shoot someone who gets in their face because they're scaring their family and other families could literally lead to grave consequences.
    They've already chosen to be part of an in-group loyalty out-group intimidation and hostility situation. They know their actions are going to rile some people up. They're looking for fear and to stir up potential conflict with people who are sick of their childish behavior. They are more likely to back up and attack others who confront anyone in their in-group.
    It will be a miracle of decent people's patience if there are no deaths caused by their irresponsible show of gun fanaticism.

  194. cma says:

    In the case of gun nuts, ignorance is obvious — and obviously bliss. FYI Anonymous, the mass shooting/killing committed by Anders Breivik occurred in Norway, not Finland. It's clear from the comments here that many gun lovers have lots of free time. Not sure that being so devoted to the church of the firearm is the ideal way to use that free time. It's probably too much to ask, but maybe some rational thought — and thought for your fellow human beings — would be more productive and constructive.

  195. I agree but would add one recommendation. Call the police on them every single time which will slow them down and make the police more annoyed by these people.

  196. Historian here:

    The evidence points to 'regulated' meaning that all citizens would muster from time to time, that we would have training on using what ever weapon we use and that we would in fact have units.

    We would all be citizen soldiers. My personal belief is that they meant each militia unit to be under the control of the individual States. I further believe that the founding fathers meant that there would be a responsibility involved in the second amendment.

    In all honesty I think the founding fathers felt that all freedoms came with responsibilities.

    If you want to see a strong militia system look to Finland or Switzerland, in both countries all men serve in some capacity (objectors can work in non fighting rolls) and continue to serve until they are 55. These men keep weapons in the home.

  197. Historian here:

    The founding fathers intended a militia that would muster for training and emergencies. That these militias would act as units with Officers. We would all be citizen soldiers.

    The 'Well regulated” part of the second amendment gives us the responsibility that the freedom to to keep and bear arms requires.

    I believe, from reading personal writings, that the founding fathers felt that all freedoms required responsibility.

    If you wish to see an example of the sort of militia I believe the founders intended look to places like Finland or Switzerland, both counties require service of some kind and also require the people who serve keep the gun they are given in service.

  198. Anonymous says:

    I am not afraid of the inanimate object, i.e., the gun. I am afraid of not knowing the intent of the person carrying it. After all, as the gun rights activist repeatedly claim: “Guns don't kill people, people [with guns] kill people.” I would have no problem openly carrying a weapon in public, however, I also understand that uncertainty that others feel, and specifically refrain from making them feel that way.

  199. Anonymous says:

    This is another way for anti-gun activist to scare the crap out of ignorant people. When the crap hits the wall who are you going to be behind. Someone running from the fight or the person with the gun and no fear to use it? Knowledge is power to use gun rationally and safely. Who is exempt from being a “Bad” guy, it all in the way it appears. Terrorist to the US are patriots from another country.

  200. Anonymous says:

    And by the power of observation, most of these people mean race. They think you're supposed to be able to tell by race. White people are the good guys in their mind. Ignore the fact that most mass shooters are white men.

  201. Jim says:

    If I walk into a restaurant with a firearm holstered on my hip, walk up to the counter, order my food, eat and then leave, I have in no way assaulted you. Now if I come over to your table and say I'm going to do something to you, that is assault. Even if I don't touch or actually harm you.

    You have to keep in mind that 35 states have open carry laws. Out side of places like Md, DC, NY, NJ, MA, CA and some other blue states It's quite common to see people open carry. It's no big deal. It's the liberal states that aren't used to seeing firearms where gun ignorant people freak out. The rest of us just go about our business

  202. Anonymous says:

    Got to love people quoting the scientific evidence of Wikipedia on this blog.

  203. Anonymous says:

    So then you punish the high school kid that already has a full day of stocking to do by making them pick up your cart of groceries and you punish the waitress… Not the owner… Who has to pay for your meal out of her check because she didn't catch you walking out and to top it off she gets to pay taxes on your meal that she paid. Lovely.

  204. Anonymous says:

    “Assume every gun is loaded.” is a standard line after every gun “accident” or “incident”.

    By extension: assume every open carrier is armed and dangerous. Simple.

  205. Anonymous is correct – cars are incredibly dangerous. Thankfully, we have to pass safety, skills and vision tests to be able to operate a car. If only the same were true for guns…

  206. Anonymous says:

    Funny, I was a gun owner before I moved over seas for work. I had a browning hp 9mm, a browning bps competition shotgun for skeet, and a 30.06 hunting rifle. What made me NOT a gun nut like most here? I left the fucking things at home, in my 2500 dollar custom gun safe, or my 1100 dollar bedside security compartment where they couldn't hurt anyone. I didn't take them out in public for no goddamn good reason. Also, I provided the police department with my papers and two rounds fired from each weapon for a comparison check, just so they had them on file. Why? Because I was a considerate gun owner and not a fruitloop.

  207. Anonymous says:

    Stupid, ignorant, uneducated, full of themselves…… only in Amerika you have a discussion like this….. the country is going downhill – fast!

  208. robert c hoppin says:

    Actually, it should be legal o require that retail businesses post a notice that they support open carry. And/or the opposite. That way those of us who don't want to spend the psychic energy to deal with additional psychic burden of shredding out the good guys with guns verses the bad guys with guns can simply take our business elsewhere. It doesn't take much of a percentage loss of business to convince retail businessmen that sucking up to the NRA and paranoid gun owners makes less sense than sucking up to those of us who see the risk of violence escalating along with the firepower of the patrons. The last time I was in Lowes, an open carry guy was walking around the store looking belligerent and drunk. That directly influences my desire to spend money in that establishment. The ultimate solution may be to have one town that requires a “well ordered militia” to legislate open carry for all citizens and see how that works out. I occasionally wonder how these open carry fans would react if I dressed up as a “bad guy” (black gangsta style would probably do the trick) looking drunk and rude, equipped enough really really big ordinance to evoke their gun reduced vulnerability. The problem with the debate is that gun owners who carry are already experiencing pretty sever vulnerability without their guns. I hear this in ALL the comments from gun carry advocates. My favorite is the vet who served in more primitive tribal social organisms (they don't consecrate social organisms to deal with interpersonal violence) who feels vulnerable in this social organism (the USA) that assigns that function to the police and the justice system. Many vets deal with the difficulty of returning to civilian life in third world countries after experiencing conflict in cultures where men/boys are armed to the teeth at the age of twelve. It is interesting that statistically rare events evoke this feeling of vulnerability to the point of dismissing the police and justice system altogether as useless. Perhaps we have evolved over thousands of years, adapting to the tribal necessity for dealing with violence on the part of (mostly male) citizens. It just feels vulnerable to live in any more evolved culture or social organism.

  209. Anonymous says:

    I agree, in fact I believe the same should be done with knives. People using knives just assume we know they don't mean any harm, they just assume we know they are just planning on cutting a piece of their steak, this is an arrogant, and narcissistic attitude. For all I know your just making sure you knife is sharp enough to slit my throat, just testing it before using it to go on a murderous rampage. So I say we take the same stance on these evil weapons of war that we have become so complacent about in our daily lives. The knife was used for thousands of years before the gun was. This is proof it's a much more subtle and effective killing machine. Simply by having these tools of death in our homes, we are virtually inviting these people into our homes saying “Come on in and kill me and my family! We'll even provide the weapons for you!” One need look no further than the popular 1978 movie “Halloween” to see how just one of these “innocent” cooking utensils can used to nearly destroy an entire town. Serious action needs to be taken to stop public use of these weapons of war disguised as cookware before they can take another life. Do it for the children!

  210. Anonymous says:

    Approach my table while marauding those big guns and you could get in a heap of trouble real quick like. Don't act a fool around me. You will be taken for a bad guy first and foremost. I will not be shot because I assume you are a good guy. I ain't a foo!

  211. Anonymous says:

    Yeah, OK, cars kill more people than guns. But you have to take a mandatory training course to drive a car, be tested to prove you can operate said car safely, be licensed to operate it (and produce that license on demand), and renew that license every few years. You're also required in most states to carry insurance. If you finance your car, the bank will require insurance whether the state does or not. Why it should be easier to own something which is designed to kill is a mystery. Being required to prove you know how to play with your toys safely is not a lot to ask.

  212. Anonymous says:

    “If you shot someone because you 'felt' threatened by a gun carrying person, expect to serve jail time.” Unless you're White and killed non-Whites. Hell, they don't even need to be carrying for you to kill them with impunity. That's what you and your ilk are fighting to preserve. At least admit it.

  213. Anonymous says:

    I only call gun owners extremists if they are parading their guns around in public places. Totally inappropriate. And dangerous.

  214. Anonymous says:

    “That's what they are, killing machines, you're defending your right to kill other humans”

    Im defending my right to kill other humans that want to kill me, to defend my life.

    But hey next time an “armed psycho” with a badge walks into a store youre in, why dont you try leaving without paying and see what happens.

  215. Anonymous says:

    But theyre not truthfully frightened. Theyre intentionally walking out without paying as a form of political protest, after being advised to do so by this article. They are doing it intentionally, and if theyve read this article, with obvious premeditation.

  216. Anonymous says:

    So, if people show up around you with guns, and youre scared, then you should protest those people by not paying for things. Thanks for validating Cliven Bundy's refusal to pay the government, since they showed up on his property armed with way more guns than any of these Open Carry people have ever brought in a Starbucks

  217. Bill Speidel says:

    We had a recent story about Open Carry rights in Norfolk, Virginia.

    James Brown was called Wyett Earp by his neighbors because he always opened carried around the neighborhood (despite misdemeanor convictions for stabbing an off duty police officer). On May 30th he decided to exercise his second amendment rights by randomly shooting and killing a high school student driving home from graduation, firing into other occupied cars, and then murdering a police officer before being slain in a gun battle. Nobody will ever know why.

    The was worse than the gun battle between two concealed carry permit holders who both felt threatened by each other after leaving a bar and turned a downtown parking garage into a shooting gallery wounding each other. Or the VB school teacher who exercised his second amendment rights by sticking his pistol in his mouth on the 1st day of classes in front of the student body only to have the police talk him into handing it over and letting him go free to later use an illegal handgun to shoot and wound another man in a drug store bullying.

    We respectful citizens who believe in the role of a professional police force really love having all these people wing nuts with weapons putting us all at risk. Thanks for everyone who encourages that. Really, thanks a lot.

  218. Anonymous says:

    Just curious, how would all of you feel if I had a claymore mine strapped to my front and back?

  219. Anonymous says:

    As someone who has been shot by an accidental discharge from a responsible gun owner I fully understand that when you are in the presence of guns your likelihood of being shot increases. The person who shot me had no intention of shooting anything but a target but accidents happen. I am not anti-gun, but I do believe in regulation and limiting where you carry. If you say you only use guns to hunt and target sport then it's absurd to bring a loaded gun to dinner. You are only asking for trouble.

  220. Anonymous says:

    The solution is simple. No one has a constitutional right to ammo. You keep your guns displayed publicly, I get your clips and ammo if you are in my business.

  221. Oldchap50 says:

    Anonymous is hiding behind the handle Anonymous. Read his rants and you know why.

  222. Anonymous says:

    @AnonymousJuly 4, 2014 at 1:47 PM

    how many times have you actually needed to use a gun on a friggin construction site to build something or in the kitchen to cook a meal?
    your point is invalid.

  223. Anonymous says:

    Well, let's see, police officers are trained to carry weapons in order to do their job of keeping the peace. Now, some Yokel wandering into a god damn McDonalds for McFlurry with an AK 47 strapped with back – it's unnecessary because it's not their f****** job. That's just small penis syndrome at its finest. Learn to f****** know the difference

  224. Anonymous says:

    “just come out and say that you do not trust a fellow upstanding citizen with a gun”

    How are people meant to distinguish between upstanding citizens and downstanding citizens? Do they wear different hats?

    Since you're all about the guns and the swagger, I assume you're also all about tactical awareness, code yellow/orange, etc.? Well, get used to people employing that against you.

  225. Anonymous says:

    Thanks for your service, now get your PTSD treated.

  226. Anonymous says:

    “Anyone who has intent to kill or mass kill isn't going to show up in a group of people with guns pretending to be law abiding.”

    Says you, drawing on your fantasies.

  227. Anonymous says:

    Flawed logic that can get you arrested. By this logic, if I feel “threatened” by a bunch of teenagers I can simply leave without paying. More ignorance from the hopelessly hoplophobic.

  228. Anonymous says:

    Here in Canada (and really anywhere but the US), leaving (or hiding) and calling 911 is the only thing anyone would do if someone walked in with a gun. It's completely insane that some people in the US would just carry on as if it's normal. No wonder mass shootings are so common and deadly in the US.

  229. Anonymous says:

    Please stop comparing guns to knives. Ugh. One person with a gun could kill multiple people in a period of seconds from across the room, even if they were physically weaker than all of those people. In the same period of time, one person with knife might be able to kill one person, but only if they were either physically stronger than the victim or snuck up from behind. Also, how many people die each year of stray bullets? Accidental shootings? I don't think very many people die of accidental stabbings. It would be a really freak thing if it happened. Frankly, I'd much rather take my chances in a room full of people carrying knives than a room with just one person with a gun.

  230. People shouldn't respond to open carry at all. Read the second amendment. Understand the rights of you and others. Don't make drama where it doesn't need to be.

  231. Anonymous says:

    I'll believe these hillbillies' unfettered defense of the second amendment and right to display when a dozen New Black Panther members enter a Cracker Barrel with sunshades on carrying AR-15s and everyone continues to gorge on their biscuits and gravy wrapped in bacon strips with a gallon-jug of Mountain Dew like it's just a regular Tuesday morning.

  232. Anonymous says:

    Grenades are banned in the US. There are very few grenade based homicides in a given year (single digits). Banning seems to work well…

  233. Anonymous says:

    I agree. Nice rack.

  234. Anonymous says:

    I'm mayonnaise. Mayonnaise don't go to prison. I don't own or carry a gun. I do get stopped for traffic violations from time to time. There were two particular stops where 1) cop wanted to beat me up, 2) cop actively escalated the conflict. I didn't get beat up or killed, because you can infer their intent. There was another stop, a two-cop car stopped me. I knew that this meant that the officers were going to be careless and prone to violence. I did nothing to escalate that situation.

    As for cops as shooters, in urban areas cops will be trained. In distant areas, you are getting the cops the cities fired. Even city cops and fire and kill when afraid. I've seen instances where you had 100 cops on the scene and one apprehended suspect that desired a suicide by cop. All was calm, except one of those 100 cops was still afraid. That cop fired, killed, and went back to work the next day. Cops are not better shooters in general. They can't do what a citizen making a citizen's arrest can do. Depending on the DA, the citizen can kill with the least amount of fear. Your movement, their fear, your death. Harris Co (Houston) was like that back in the mid 80's. Chicago stopped the practice of shooting suspects that ran away, rather than running after them. This is fluid.

    In retail, the workers are expected by policy to do nothing when robbed. Back at the home office, they ensure those employees for way more than the employee's family receives when the employee is killed at work. They profit from their employee's death. Don't do biz at these businesses.

    We have a real military now. We have law enforcement now. The killers that the open carry people want to cite, will wait until they are off camera to capture their victim. No carry matters at that point. Carrying won't stop these people. We live in cities. Back before sheriff's took your handgun away when you rode into town, people minding their own business were getting killed. Civilization forced gun control. The right is taking us back, back to a world we wouldn't want to live in. I don't want to live in a nation where open carry is considered reasonable.

    Nobody bothers me even in bad places. Police generally do their job. But, my open carry family member is a nut even when he isn't open carrying. I worry about nuts.

  235. Anonymous says:

    I would hope a plane to Germany in a minute, but going into the U.S. military invalidated my dual citizenship, what you get with a German mom, and American dad, and a birth certificate from a U.S. Army hospital. My citizenship is constantly challenged. But, to get back to Germany, I would have to emigrate like any other non-German. And, after nearly 60 years of it, what was the point? The right wing is succeeding in destroying our country. Open carry is just one part of that. Life on a foreign U.S. Army base is a matter of hanging on to little pieces of the country, and going home again after four years of censorship and idealism. But, yes, I'd get on that plane if I could.

  236. Anonymous says:


  237. Anonymous says:

    Thank you for this article. I have not encountered this but know that it is a matter of time. This is sound advice and will save countless lives.

  238. Anonymous says:

    Lets be honest I have conceal carry and all but these people are off their rocker. If anyone wants to take a rifle into an establishment to make a point. Why dont they go to the nearest grade school and push down little kids? To bare arms for protection is one thing to be a bully about it is another. You have a right to bare arm not to scare innocent bystanders. Lets be smart about it not obnoxious about it to push your beliefs on someone is wrong just think if this was a religion all of you would be in an uproar.

  239. Anonymous says:

    Hell, the City of South Tucson no longer exists, because one of it's officers got shot by a City of Tucson officer answering the same call. The two officers were not sufficiently coordinated. One of them, at least, was a pro. Even if these open carry people have gone to tactics classes, they are by no means coordinated enough to deal with a crowd of open carry people.

  240. Anonymous says:

    And, there is your own PTSD having just killed someone. If you shoot someone, you are going to be messed up.

  241. Anonymous says:

    Your attempt at economic pressure on the store will not be well received in Texas…

  242. Anonymous says:

    Guns aren't the only thing that kills people, but I will say this: Guns sure make it a hell of a lot easier and quicker to kill people. Anecdotal evidence here: there was a Chinese boy who came to his high school with a knife and stabbed something upwards of 30 people before they caught him. Everybody lived, even if they had a rather rough experience. In comparison, similar incidents in the good ol' USA don't end so well when you look at Aurora and NewTown with guns swapped in. Callous as it sounds, but I feel I would much rather have to deal with someone with a knife vs a gun. Final point: gun ownership is a right, but as all rights granted to us citizens go, only a right until it infringes upon the rights of others.

  243. Anonymous says:

    I am an American service member, and I just want to relay a few facts for all of you anti-gun folks; 1: Our forefathers and I have fought, bled, and many have died for the right to own, carry and use firearms within the sovereign USA, and in the 1940's that right prevented foreign axis powers from sending mass invasion forces into the US, because constitutionally every citizen has the RIGHT TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS (Arms meaning firearms for those that can't put 2 and 2 together). 2nd: If you insist on stripping me and my fellow Americans of our right to keep and bear arms; a constitutional right guaranteed and appointed to us by our forefathers to ensure that we Americans remain free from the tyranny of our enemies bot foreign and domestic, and you insist on blaming all gun owners for crimes that a select few have committed, then it should only be fair that you (the anti-gun antagonists) should loose your drivers licenses and all rights to roadways and interstates because drunk drivers kill more people every year in the US then pro-gun supporters do. Lastly, if you wish to strip us the Americans with guns, then shut up and go earn your right to strip our right (never gonna happen because you don't believe you should be able to use or open carry a firearm).

  244. Anonymous says:

    You know when a gun owner is a threat? He's shooting at somebody duh.
    Guy's sitting in a both chowing down on his cheeseburger with a gun holstered is not a threat. Crying wolf because omg he's armed, and I'm afraid is a argument of irresponsibility. If a shooter DID come in the armed guy might save your life (even if he got shot as you run away) he's willing to TRY.
    I can't save the irresponsible using a zip gun. look it up next time you're of the opinion that it's even remotely conceivable that it's possible to remove guns from civilians. But I can surprise an armed cop with a zip gun, take his weapon and shoot up any gun free zone as a target rich environment with no possible way someone might shoot back.
    Because of the ignorance of this author and most of the commentators. A firearm like a car, a knife, a crossbow, a hammer, a ball point pen is a tool. Application is where it becomes a threat.

  245. Anonymous says:

    In the event of an justifiable shooting the aggressor is charged not the defender. You post is inaccurate

  246. Anonymous says:

    My hope is that the next time a group of these morons enters an Applebees with their machine guns, a concealed gun owner will stand his ground and execute every single one of these NRA nuts. Shoot them in the brains. It is perfectly legal to do so if it is a Stand Your Ground state.

  247. Anonymous says:

    Ask those two dead cops in Nevada how dangerous these Tea Party terrorists are. The Open Carry people now have a death count. The NRA is a terrorist organization.

  248. Anonymous says:

    This is excellent. I plan to do the same thing if one of these mindless idiots comes strolling in with their guns on display. These jerks have the mental capacities of insects and can't read the big words in this article and truly understand that I can't distinguish them from the guy who gunned down the kids in Newtown.

  249. Anonymous says:

    You do something I don't like, so I leave, and somehow *I'm* the bad guy?

  250. Anonymous says:

    Far more people die from heart disease. Where is the outrage/action for these porkers running medical costs up for everyone? Or the government that created cheap, greasy burgers and other unhealthy food?

    Thank the screwed up society destroyed over the last century. More people do not respect life, working for what you want, take no responsibility, care nothing about the effect of their actions, do not put the effort to raise their children, etc.

  251. Anonymous says:

    Sure you have. Ever see a police officer? They ALL carry guns all the time. If it is really rational to be afraid of someone with a weapon then you should be afraid of all law enforcement officers.

  252. Anonymous says:

    The smartest responses I have seen have been the understanding that when I see a person with a weapon, I do not get to see or assume intent. Likewise, currently the law does not ensure maximum preventive efforts. Someone mentioned having specific insurance to cover a gun owner's liability in car of an incident along with annual training that is verified and the weapons being taxed as personal property. That would be helpful but I also feel that businesses that allow patronage who open carry must post that publicly where it can be seen before entering. This ensures that those who do not want to risk it, never go in, and roar who may also carry and react can have prior knowledge to temper that reaction.

    Benefit: if I am somewhere without that notification and a person enters with a weapon, I can assume they are choosing to ignore the establishments rules either in ignorance or with ill intent and then I can leave, call the police, etc.

  253. Of course, the second or third time you do that, the police will arrest you for filing a false complaint.

    Also, you'll be tying up police who might be needed for actual crimes.

    Or, they may just start ignoring all “man with a gun” reports.

    All because you're a pussy.

  254. Anonymous says:

    the best way to treat them
    a hearty hand shake and a few intelligent questions. if you fee like it ask about their choice of weapon. If they wax rhapsodic about the virtues of this or that gun they are an enthusiast if they start foaming at the mouth they are a zealot.

  255. Anonymous: No, you can shoot under circumstances that a rational person would consider to be life threatening, such as if someone points a gun or knife at you, or attempts to run you over.

    You'd be committing murder and we'd send you to fry.

    But thanks for demonstrating why YOU should never own a gun–you're unstable, irrational and stupid.

    So of course, you believe everyone else is.

  256. So, practicing with a gun makes them scary, not practicing with a gun makes them scary.

    I think we've determined the real problem–you're a pussy with an unhealthy focus on weapons.


    – See more at:

    – See more at:

    Real statistics from actual crimes show guns are the most effective form of self defense. I am an expert in this field, you're a wussbag on the internet bleating stuff repeated by other wussbags. So when you bleat to me about safety, I laugh at you.

    Nor would it matter. The booze in your cabinet is more likely to cause a car wreck than save your life. We have these things called “rights.”

    But you could move to some other country. In fact, as an immigrant to the US, that's exactly what I did.

  258. Hilarious watching “liberals” attempt to prove they're not racist.

    FYI, black people carry all the time around here. No one cares. Though apparently privileged white liberals have an unrealistic view of reality.

  259. “At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”

    FYI: Those aren't machine guns. They're rifles.

  260. Mark Fiorino says:

    Wow, this place is awesome.

    Can any of you point out any trends where open carry has been proven to be dangerous? You know, like an ongoing, relatively consistent pattern of accidents or negligence involving people who open carry firearms, which validates this incredible fear that you people all have of citizens exercising their rights in this way that scares you and offends your little sensibilities?

    Good luck. Because saying “open carry is dangerous” or barking about how you don't trust people with guns is just another way of saying you're paranoid and out of touch with reality. I almost feel bad for you folks, but your lack of willingness to open your minds to possibilities you don't yet understand makes you unworthy of pity. It's just such a shame because some of you seem like you're pretty smart under that blanket of oppressive fear and loathing of things you don't agree with.

  261. Stoobz says:

    We only have to look back a year or two to see the disparity between white and black gun owners. A white guy hunts down and shoots an unarmed black kid on his way home from the store – justified self defense. A black guy shoots a white man who is on his property, in the process of assaulting his child – murder. The pretense that this is about anything but intimidation is ridiculous. It's about a bunch of white guys who see their priviledge waning walking around reminding everyone that they're both armed and sociopathic, and therefore should be taken seriously in spite of the fact that they're utterly out of touch with reality. In any sane country, they would be in mental health facilities, rather than walking around terrifying innocent people and putting everyone around them in danger.

  262. Moi says:

    Anonymous is not worth a reply.

  263. Anonymous says:

    I have no problem with responsible gun ownership. I simply don't trust anyone who would carry a gun in public as one would a purse. In my opinion anyone who carries a gun without a badge is Not one of the good guys, Not trustworthy and not sane. Open and carry is not responsible gun ownership.

  264. Dean Smith says:

    So the author is condoning, and actually encouraging, people to commit crimes? Last I heard theft is still a crime. The author, and many of you should be a little more tolerant about firearms. After all, of it weren't for firearms we'd all be having tea and crumpets, yelling “God bless the Queen.” If you don't like guns, don't own one. If you don't want to be around one, by all means leave. But pay for your meal, don't teach your children it's OK to steal if you see something you don't agree with. You'll still pass on your values while still teaching right from wrong.

  265. Dean Smith says:

    Unfortunately, most of us are.

  266. Anonymous says:

    Wow… what a discussion. As I'm not an American; I really don't have any right to have a say in the whole matter; and should probably keep my bullshit opinions to myself…. however…. I live in a country where we have OC of long gun style firearms (not in public places) only during hunting seasons; and only those individuals with legitimate need to carry a firearm as part of their job can obtain a 'concealed carry' permit for sidearms; after a thorough criminal records check. Not a perfect system by any stretch; however you know if you walk into a convenience store at 11 PM; and someone is in there with a firearm; it's time to leave… no; you don't get to draw down on them and get your testosterone boost and maybe nuke a couple of them in the process…. sorry this is where you can go to prison for a very long time if you do stupid stuff.

    Now the person that referred to all Texans as 'retarded'….. shame on you. The only one that is working at a mentally diminished capacity in that statement is YOU. I've worked in the oil and gas industry for over 40 years; and as we all know the hub of the industry is Houston TX. I've worked and lived in the state of Texas; and I've met hundreds of gun owners (I'm one too); and in all those years; I've never met a Texan (personally) that I would consider to be; as you so stupidly put it; 'retarded' and owns a gun; and is high on the fact that they do own one (or more). The persons that I know, go to gun ranges, and target practice… so what; golfers go to a range and practice too; oh and by the way; someone can beat you to death with a nine-iron as well…. you don't need to use a gun. Ask Tiger Woods what a golf club upside the head feels like.

    On a personal level; I would support concealed carry (even in this country) more so than OC simply because; I don't want to intimidate some poor schmuck that is afraid of firearms at the best of times. Why would I subject them to seeing me with my AR over my shoulder and my Sig Sauer P226 on my hip with 2 extra clips; and looking like a throwback to 'The Deerhunter'. Firstly; it's not their business; and secondly it's for me; and my protection, and not to intimidate people; and I know it's on my hip; and if I get put in a situation by the criminal element; I'm quite capable of defending my self and my loved ones… pure and simple… defending one's self. This is the same perspective that my friends who were born and raised in Texas look at it from. My opinion; coming from one of those 'liberal' gun owners… (being liberal doesn't mean you want to ban all firearms or the right to carry them… it means 'responsible ownership and usage'; and if it comes down to someone doing harm to your family; absolutely defend your loved ones with prejudice. As the US 'Navy Jack' states; “Don't Tread on Me”

    There… two cents from an impartial third party

  267. Anonymous says:

    The 'Ammosexuals” regard collateral damage – the loss of innocent lives – as acceptable. There is no rationalizing with these people.

  268. Anonymous says:

    I carry a gun for defense of myself and my property. My hand gun is a Glock 17, I have a 2 rifles 22 Ruger 10/22 .30-06 Springfield. I have used the handgun two times to warn people off my property that were stealing my bee hives (I fired my pistol in the ground twice to get their attention and I hunt…..

    Oh and by the way I live in Toronto

  269. Stoobz says:

    Given the massive evidence of racism in the American culture and justice system, there is no reason to believe black people commit more crimes than white people. Show an American a picture of a white man robbing a black man at knife point, and 5 minutes later 75% of Americans will remember it as the black man robbing the white man. That's 3/4 people who are looking at a picture KNOWING that they'll be tested on it. Eye witnesses are even less reliable when a gun is involved. Blacks are discriminated against at every level, from racist witnesses to racist police to racist lawyers and judges. This is not conjecture, this is scientific fact, easily verified by actually taking the time to test things. They are railroaded into prison in order to provide a pool of state subsidized, de-facto slaves to labor on behalf of wealthy whites. The only reason to believe blacks are more likely to commit crimes than whites is that they are more likely to live in a state of desperate poverty with no other means of survival, and frankly those people primarily commit their crimes close to home, and against one another, because that way the police don't much care.

    By contrast, people openly carrying loaded firearms almost certainly belong to one of two groups – either they are criminals about to rob the place, or they belong to an extremist ideology that has been responsible for 75% of all terrorist acts on US soil in the last 30 years, and members of which openly advocate the use of violence as the first and best resort in any confrontation.

    I know which group I find scarier.

  270. Nicki says:

    You and anyone else who supports this lunacy is nothing but a common thief. You have no respect for the owners of the establishments you propose to loot merely to make a political point. You don't care about their property, or the fact that you appropriate their resources and efforts for your own selfish ends. You are nothing but thieving creeps, who are much worse criminals than people who choose to publicly exercise their LEGAL rights.

  271. Anonymous says:

    Why are all of these open-carry demonstrators white people? How come we don't have groups of black people demonstrating their 2nd amendment rights by entering stores with semi-automatic rifles?

  272. Anonymous says:

    I live in a state where open carry is mainly banned. I like it that way. People in other states should ask their state reps about it and maybe have their own demonstrations about banning open carry within city limits.

  273. Anonymous says:

    good lord, these gun activist sound like arrogant assholes who see themselves as action movie stars that want you to ignore that they are brandishing a weapon of murder because they are waiting for the next massacre to happen.

  274. Anonymous says:

    100% of people murdered by guns are shot by someone holding one.

  275. Anonymous says:

    to all the asshats who say..oh more cars kill people.. first of all..there are more cars and have to be licensed, have insurance, take tests and pay money to have a car. your don't do much of any of that for a gun. youjust have to be an asshat with a small dick and a big ego.

  276. Anonymous says:

    I am all for expressing 2nd amendment rights. It's the communist gun grabbers who should have one pointed at their head.

  277. Anonymous says:

    These open carry assholes are not cops, they are not militia fighting a foreign power. They are power hungry and they are dangerous. They have NO Training in law enforcement and are unmarked. They could be anyone. They are anyone. What do we think they are going to do when they witness shiplifting? Are they going to make a detention without aiming their guns? No! They are going to unlawfully brandish and threaten. Then when the police show up and inform them of their crime, they will all threaten the police. It's simply obvious where this is all going. They are walking down the street EXPECTING to be confrontational. So they are goign to get confrontational.

  278. Anonymous says:

    They're just as bad and ridiculous as the occupy wall street crowd. Except because they have guns, we have to take them a little more seriously.

  279. Jeff says:

    I love that you compare the gun with the automobile, as they are both deadly and should be heavily regulated.

  280. Laci The Dog says:

    The “good guy with a gun” shooting another “good guy with a gun” happened the first day Georgia's guns everywhere law went into effect.

  281. Anonymous says:

    The woman has her finger too close to the trigger. I would see her as an aggressor preparing to kill and she would be shot on the spot

  282. Anonymous says:

    Honestly you are what's wrong with the world, please suck start an M9 and do us all a favor

  283. CaptnBilly says:

    You cannot be a good person and carry a gun. Make up your mind. Either carry a gun or try to be a good person. You cannot do both. The point of a gun is power. The point of a good person is humility.

  284. Anonymous says:

    no matter what any of you say about guns. that fact is that we are not in the old west anymore and anyone walking in with weapons that are not officers are a threat. You can put all the stats of cars or anything else that kills people, guns still scare people and that is the purpose of a gun. to scare and protect. I owned guns and I lived in texas. I still would not walk around with it. Showing arms is just asking for trouble. One day a person is going to be around the wrong person and get shot just for having a weapon showing. I hope that wont happen but there is a good chance it will happen.

  285. Anonymous says:

    I agree, you should leave…THE COUNTRY!

  286. serioussam says:

    and now ladies and germs, ignorant commentary.

  287. serioussam says:

    your point being?

  288. Anonymous says:

    Salut Jean-Jacques, in Montreal here, entirely agree!

  289. What an absurd posting. First of all, this author shows complete irrational fear of lawful citizens simply because they happen to be lawfully armed. It's so funny how the gun grabbers accuse our side of being paranoid and fearful when it's clear they are the ones living in perpetual fear.

    But more importantly, the author is advocating committing a crime! That's right, taking services from a business without paying is illegal, and rightfully so. There is no exception made for the precense of lawfully armed citizens who are not threatening anyone. Leaving without paying is still against the law. Again the irony is obvious. The gun carriers you display such irrational fear of are the ones being lawful, while the gun banners (or at least one of them) is advocating breaking the law.

    So go ahead, leave without paying. Do that and the cops will show up, not for the lawful open carriers, but for you. You break the law by stealing from honest businesses and you will have to answer for it, and rightfully so. Please do what this author advocates. It will reveal to the world what gun banners really are: A group of lawless fanatics who think stealing is a good way to make a political point. Tell that to the judge at your trial and see how far it gets you.

  290. There is no reasonable fear of a holstered/rear slung firearm. If you draw a firearm on someone carrying a firearm in a legal manner, then you are the agressor and subject to arrest. Best thing to do is ignore people who open carry until an immediate threat arises.

  291. ryan says:

    The woman in front is holding her gun, finger on the trigger. That's threatening. I would not blame anybody for distancing themselves from this person. These are activists trying to make a point? Spread awareness? I see no signs, no open mouths speaking their stance, no attempt to enlighten anybody.

  292. Mike Shaffer says:

    I've never understood why the police weren't called each and every time. Attempted armed robbery is when you walk into a place that sells stuff with a weapon. What the hell else are the store managers supposed to think? Now, most of the folks have their weapons minus clips and strung across their shoulders, which is still stupid in a public place…and others have a clip loaded and their finger at the ready position. Really? And you're still breathing? What year and century is this again?

  293. You mean annoyed by you for making bogus police calls. I'm a cop myself and it would upset me if you called my department for no reason. And if you leave a business without paying for the services they have provided you, rest assured I will arrest you. Perhaps you didn't realize this, but stealing is against the law.

  294. Anonymous says:

    Police get paid by the hour on their 8-12 hour shift, most cops find slow situations amusing more than annoying.

  295. Anonymous says:

    I grew up on military bases. It was not uncommon to see many airmen carrying high-capacity rifles. I never once felt uncomfortable because I knew they were the “good guys”. I would feel very uneasy if some random people showed up at the restaurant or store I was in carrying the same type of weapons.

  296. Leoncefalo says:

    The debate for and against firearms will go on as long as the 2nd Amendment is a part of the US Constitution. Simply said, for the next 500 years, when everyone here will be gone. No one is really interested in continuing the discussion of mental health therapy, or access to weapons by minors, mental patients, felons and ex felons, open carry narcissistic whores who have no respect at all for normal citizens.

    This gun business is both an individual and a community issue. BOTH camps have righteous points, and selfish points. Those need to be described and identified in excruciating detail so that we have all the information we need on such a complex issue to make morally and legally sound decisions. It will always be a tragedy when an innocent person dies at the hands of a shooter.

    Let the discussions begin. . . .soon, and often, and everywhere. . . . .especially in Texas!!!

  297. Kelby Busch says:

    Bahahaha, guns are tools used to kill people, hilarious! So are the knives in the kitchen of that restaurant, or the knives hanging in the cooking utensil isle of the supermarket, or a hammer, ball bat, tire tool, rock, sock full of pennies, etc. I guess what I'm getting at is that if someone wants to kill someone else, they will find a “tool” to do it with, no matter where you're at; and I would feel MUCH safer if a group of open carry activist walked into the restaurant, than a group of thug looking rough necks with baggy ass jeans and crooked hats that had no visible weapons.

  298. Kelby Busch says:

    Wow Amy, since when did dine-n-dash become a life threatening situation? All the open carry folks would do is laugh when the people got in trouble for not paying.

  299. Anonymous says:

    If they are standing at the door, you have no choice but to break a window with a chair and try to get out. If you value your life, you must act immediately and do anything in your power to get yourself out of the situation. You have to assume they are there to kill everyone in the restaurant.

  300. PiedType says:

    You've explained my position perfectly. I will immediately leave any establishment where guns appear. I won't be sticking around to figure what the gun owner is up to and I won't be worrying about the business owner's lost sale. And yes, I will be calling the police. In this day and age, anyone brandishing a gun in public is a threat until proven otherwise.

  301. Anonymous says:

    I never heard of somebody getting killed because someone was cleaning their knife/shovel/car/bat.

  302. Anonymous says:

    “getting one's self and family away from a potential mass shooting”

    Probably shouldn't ever leave your house then. Since most of the same folks who want open carry are also, every day, carrying concealed legally. The only difference is now, you know it. So.. Now you know this too. Better stay inside and call 911 every time Amazon or Peapod drop off your orders and food. Hope your job doesn't mind you being a hoplophobic shutin..

    “and interestingly, if armed and feeling threatened, I can literally shoot and kill one of these losers and not only not go to jail”

    No.. You can't. You have to be able to prove that you feared for your life and the mere sight of another firearm isn't enough to do that. But, you go ahead and enjoy your time in Federal 'Pound Me In The Ass' Prison…

  303. What will probably happen is that one of the activists will get shot by a jumpy police officer.

  304. Bronwyn says:

    It puzzles me that anyone would want to live somewhere where people carry guns. Correction: where people think they need the protection of guns. Nowhere else in the “first world” do citizens fear for their safety to the extent of wanting to be armed. My mind just boggles. Eventually the sane Americans will emigrate.

  305. Paul Kisling says:

    I find it Ironic that cars which are much fewer in number and supposedly not created for killing actually kill more people then weapons which there are far greater in number and were created for killing….

    So what these people are saying is that that the huge discrepancy is just fine as long as its not intentional??? On what planet does that make sense?

    While we are at it lets ask Elliot Rodgers what he prefers for killing?? He like Knives, Cars, and Guns in that order.

    The car may not be for killing it sure does kill a lot of people unintentionally!!!!

  306. Paul Kisling says:

    I wouldn't pull a gun on you. I would write down your license plate and give it to the cops. Then testify in court if needed that you are a thief….

  307. Paul Kisling says:

    Separate but Equal eh Zoe? You would have fit in just fine during the Jim Crow days.

  308. Anonymous says:

    You know, even with your big guns, you can't make me stay and pay attention to you. I see your guns, I leave–letting the door hit the establishment in the wallet on my way out.

  309. Anonymous says:

    Getting up and leaving without paying? So, you're advocating theft in response to open carry of firearms? You're really suggesting violating a law because others are obeying it?

  310. Paul Kisling says:

    Of course Canada did not fight for its independence either. It was “rewarded” for doing being a good doggy. Sit, stay, roll over…

  311. Paul Kisling says:

    I figure you can tell whom is intent on killing just by looking where the gun is aimed.. I mean the police do it all them time. I know its crazy but guns don't just jump up and shoot you. They actually have to be pointed…

  312. Anonymous says:

    Speaking as the manager of a store, I wouldn't blame my customers one bit for leaving if someone came in waving a lethal weapon (gun, large knife, baseball bat, whatever). I probably wouldn't even notice, because I'd be too busy diving behind my counter. (Go ahead and call me a wimp. You won't be the first.)

    As for why someone in a retail establishment would trust a police officer with an openly displayed weapon and not a private citizen: Armed officers in the store are bad for business. They make the staff and the customers nervous, despite the fact that the officers go out of their way not to alarm the citizenry. Every police officer I've seen in my store has been armed with a handgun, not a rifle, and has had that gun in its holster, with the holster snapped closed, and with the officer's hands away from the holster, not resting on the gun. If an officer came in with a rifle in his/her hands, well, it's diving behind the counter time again. (I wonder if our marble countertop would stop a bullet. Maybe I should look into getting it reinforced.)

  313. Paul Kisling says:

    Gee really? Owning a gun is risk and a responsibility just like most things in life. If you use it improperly you can lose your freedom. I am pretty sure all legal gun owners and carriers are even more aware of this than your police buddy…

    Funny how that DOES NOT APPLY when the Police shoot and hit an innocent.. I am pretty sure you are saying that when a cop does it that it is okay and they are not a legitimate target….

  314. Paul Kisling says:

    That should be interesting. You call the police after STEALING a meal for a false report… Nice. Combine that with conspiracy to break the law and that should get you a felony record.

  315. Paul Kisling says:

    Where you do err on the stupid is that you consider only WHAT YOU SEE to be dangerous…. What you can see is not nearly as dangerous as what you cannot… But whatever helps you sleep at night.

  316. Anonymous says:

    There's something about female gun nuts that is so disconcerting…like, they seem like they are far worse than the males…like they have a legit screw loose and could be dangerous. That blonde chick in the photo above, for example…she looks like she abducts children and skins them alive…there's something strange in her face.

  317. Paul Kisling says:

    That reminds me of what happened just the other day. One of Bloombergs anti gun members was arrested for Raping a woman. Imagine that. A man who did not want people to have a weapon while he was out raping… Funny how the news can go both ways..

  318. Paul Kisling says:

    Is that how you regard criminals taking lives also??? Or is it just the law abiding you hate?

  319. Paul Kisling says:

    Because the blacks know if they show up with rifles the cops will gun them down!!!

  320. NickM says:

    The article propose “leave without paying” as a reaction if a bunch of open-carrying nuts show up in your restaurant. This is insufficient. If I see anyone with an assault rifle anyplace other than a gun range or some other obviously special context, I'm leaving, and then I'm calling 911 and telling them I see a possible shooter on the premises and to send the SWAT team please. And so should everyone else. Even if it is legal to open carry wherever I am, I damn well want the cops following their every move. I trust the cops way more than I trust those who fetishize weapons designed for war and mass-murder, sorry, and who's to say random person carrying an assault rifle isn't an actual psycho about to commit directed or indiscriminate murder?

  321. Paul Kisling says:

    That is some fantasy world you live in. Humility is not the sole requisite to being “good”. No more than lack of humility is the sole requisite for being “bad”.

  322. Paul Kisling says:

    Funny how you leave out being a criminal and concealing your weapon up until the crime as being wrong… No its the ones who obey the law that must be dealt with.

  323. Paul Kisling says:

    I find it amusing that people think they can just get away with walking out of a restaurant without paying and calling the police to report a crime other than their own…

    First of all its CONSPIRACY to commit THEFT..
    Second it is THEFT.
    Third it is Filing a False Report.

    That should get you at the very least a Felony record. I will be glad to write down your license plate number and rat you out to the police. Then testify against you if needs be in a court of law. Then laugh at you as the jury convicts or laugh even harder when I see you picking up garbage by the side of the road for you 1000 hours of community service.

    This ridiculous article is advocating breaking the law. If enough people actually do this incredibly stupid move it will constitute a RICO violation as an ongoing criminal conspiracy. Advocating breaking the law is a not a CRIME until people start breaking the law at your behest.

  324. Anonymous says:

    “You are 367% more likely to be killed in a car than by any firearm in the US, and your chances of being murdered in the US are about .0028%”
    These facts are not truly equal.
    False equivalency again.
    To be truly equal, it would be “What if everyone else had a car and YOU didn't have a car?”
    Try running down the middle of the freeway during rush hour and see how long you last.
    What are your percentage odds then?

  325. You guys are not very bright. I would rather have an open carry group sitting in a theater with me when a guy walks in with a joker mask, smoke grenades, pipe bombs and a gun. In fact, once the Joker saw the open carry group, I seriously doubt we will chose the theater I am sitting in.

    I will leave my gun at home when you pay for my body guard.

  326. NickM says:

    No, you call 911 when you see something potentially dangerous that first responders should respond to. A person walking into a restaurant, school, movie theater, whatever, with an assault rifle, is An Official 911 Situation. In 10 more seconds there could be dozens of people shot, for all you know, it's happened a bunch of times in just the last year or two. And protecting yourself and your family by getting the hell out is not theft, it's self-defense. If said person with an assault rifle actually is just a peaceful protestor, great, but I'm damn well going to have a cop there to double-check.

  327. common sense says:

    People who carry guns openly have no common sense because if another gun toting crazy comes in, the first person they aim to take out is you. The only thing you are doing is putting the target on your back. Duh!!!!

  328. Anonymous says:

    My instinct is to get out of harm's way, and to teach my children to recognize danger and get out of harm's way, as quickly as possible. It is not worth our lives to try to guess the intention of someone brandishing a dangerous weapon in a public space. It is nuts to stay.

  329. Anonymous says:

    the gun whackos are not owed any explanations. they are not entitled to any ounce of trust as to who they are or their capabilities. they are not deputized law enforcement. you are within your right to not deal with them and they have no business approaching you or trying to sway your decisions in any shape or form. you are entitled to YOUR rights as well and YOUR right to personal safety is not theirs to decide or question.

  330. Anonymous says:

    the best years of your life dripped down the back seat of a '83 camaro

  331. Anonymous says:

    This is the problem with gun arguments. What always gets lost in the rhetoric is the main issue. The behavior of an individual. A gun is not the only object created by the human race that is effective at injury or death.

  332. Anonymous says:

    Anonymous said, “Only the ignorant are scared of inanimate objects, even if cars kill 30,000+ people in the US every year, but here are some FACTS:
    You are 367% more likely to be killed in a car than by any firearm in the US, and your chances of being murdered in the US are about .0028%
    Thank you for you informative feedback. As a matter of fact, if I was shopping in a store or dining out, and someone was to drive a car into the establishment, I would leave just as quickly as if someone had walked in with a gun.

  333. Anonymous says:

    “An irrational fear of others engaged in a lawful activity” works both ways, doesn't it? Why the need to bring a gun to a sandwich shop? What are you afraid of?

  334. Anonymous says:

    When Texas open carry advocates welcome a parade of armed Black Panthers, then I will be fine with open carry. Funny thing is, the NRA was all in favor of gun control when people of color talked about arming themselves. History.

  335. Anonymous says:

    Really? Comparing auto deaths to gun deaths…. or even knives? You guys are graaping at straws.

    How about a statistic that means something in this conversation:

    'An American is 4 times more likely, including the gun owner, to be shot in the presence of a gun. '

    Just by walking into a place open carry in effect, you are putting people in 4 times more danger. That's why there should be no open carry.

  336. Anonymous says:

    No gun is designed to break the law. Guns are made to shoot bullets. What they are used for is a function of the person using them. Quit demonizing guns, and focus on the problem, which is a lack of treatment for mentally ill people in the US.

  337. Jim. In the photo here, and most of the examples of activists for Open-Carry, the law abiding activists have their guns in hand. I can't tell if the safety is on or off because I wouldn't know where to look. If someone has a huge rifle in their hands when I see no other visible threat, I'd take it that they are about to start something. I can have my open carry dildo at easy access on my keychain, but if its on high vibrate and my zipper is open most people would think I'm about to start publically masterbating.

  338. Anonymous says:

    Why in the name of all that is holy do you think someone would try to “get behind” the person with the gun? If the bullets are flying, how is a person to know who is the good guy with the gun and who is not? What happens if the “good guy” thinks the person running to “get behind” is an aggressor and shoots them?

    Oh right, they're going to be calm and level-headed. They certainly aren't going to have adrenaline blazing through their veins and and a messiah complex dancing in their heads. And as always, some proponents seem to live in this fantasy land where a “good guy” is waiting at every scene “when the crap hits the wall”, ready to bring a swift and heroic end to a terrible situation. Face it, they're more likely to cause collateral damage or simply get shot themselves (by the perpetrator or even police).

  339. Anonymous says:

    THIS is what can happen when the “good guys” carry weapons

  340. Anonymous says:

    Yes, I feel so very safe with these types of idiots walking around with weapons ….

  341. Or by you…

  342. The entire second paragraph is fundamentally wrong, and this is precisely what open carry advocates are trying to teach you. It is *not* rational to be afraid of someone with a weapon; it is paranoid and ignorant. If anything, you should feel safer with these people around. If you're afraid of anyone, it should be the criminals who are carrying concealed.

  343. You think we're not aware of that? The purpose of the Second Amendment is not hunting or even personal self-defense against common criminals. It's to guarantee that the people have the power to kill police officers and soldiers if and when the government goes bad.

  344. Anonymous says:

    Thank you for posting this. I have thought about this since hearing of these open carry stunts (which gladly doesn't occur in my state yet, but will happen, no doubt). My initial thought was I would call the cops (something mentioned here by another commenter). But your proposal also makes perfect sense. Move out from the situation, and then alert authorities.

    Commenting anonymously to avoid whatever number of “rational” pro-guns people who think that everyone should enjoy and be happy that they are carrying their lethal equipment everywhere like cowboys.

  345. Anonymous says:

    No I'm not!

  346. Anonymous says:

    A “gun nut” carries a gun into a restaurant, target, etc. A gun enthusiast carries a gun to a practice range, hunting trip, etc, and keeps the weapons home otherwise. One's an idiot waiting for a tragic accident, I have no problems with the other.

  347. Anonymous says:

    Please tell the law abiding open carry people to wear white hats and the armed criminals intending on committing massacres to wear black hats so that we can tell one from the other, thank you.

  348. Ronnie A says:

    @uhlbelk: ” those “surveys” on defensive gun use, claim that approximately 300k homicides are prevented each year from defensive gun use.”

    Um, no they don't. They claim that CRIMES are prevented. Most people who break into your house or try to rob you, even people who are armed robbers, don't actually kill people. Just like most armed robberies and muggings, a self defensive gun use doesn't usually involve firing the gun, they just involve using the gun as a tool to intimidate people into doing what you want. The robber uses the gun to entice you to giving him your money. A victim uses the gun to entice the criminal to go away.

  349. Anonymous says:

    Fearing open carry is completely ridiculous. Criminals conceal their illegal firearms up until the point of committing their crime. Criminals do not open carry. Law abiding citizen firearm owners both open and conceal carry depending on their local laws. We have both open and concealed carry here in Minnesota. People open carry regularly and there is no “blood in the streets” or “shootouts at the OK Corral” as this fear monger wants you to believe. What a load of dung this person is foisting on you “sheeple”.

  350. Anonymous says:

    Hi people. Ok so first of all, I am french. I am not qualified to emit any critisism about how you guys choose to live in USA. Not my problem (even if I do have an opinion, of course). But, as a human to my fellow human, or as an outside observer, I would say that:
    As you probably know, we are not allowed to carry weapons in europe. We do have some criminality, with the usual batch of horrors that goes with it. I ll leave the statistics to professionals, but from where I stand, it s pretty much the same as in USA.
    – I dont know, or ever heard of anyone getting killed by a gun in my entire life. Of course, there s an occasional shoot out between criminals once in a while, and it could eventually take an innocent bystander along with it, but that s the end of it, and it s super rare!
    None of my friends, relatives, friends of my friends, whatever, ever got shot by anyone.
    – No french kid never EVER got shot at his school (nevermind dozen of them in one go)
    – I really dont think I am in danger or threaten in anyway
    We do have roadkills though, but hey! We have cars!
    Also, that s just my opinion, but I hear a lot that “Yeah but carrying gun is a constitutional right”. Ok, so first of all, that is subject to discussion. The way I heard it is “actually you dont” it s bit long to explain, but basically the original US constitution said that “citizen armed group or militia are allowed when the state is unable to respond” which is slightly different than “We all have the right to be lock and loaded”. The NRA and Reagan twisted the law a little for commercial purposes.
    But I leave you debat that with an United States legal specialist. The pont is: Hey! dont you mistake a RIGHT from a DUTY?
    I mean ok, you got the RIGHT to have (or carry) a weapon, but that dont mean YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO.
    Like, we have the RIGHT to drink booze before 21, but we dont absolutely suck on every fucking bottle we find! For fuck sake! And look at the people that does!!!
    Last point: You claim that “we need gun to defend ourselves”… How insulting is that to US police forces? I mean, those guys are on duty 24/7 and they suck that bad that you all got to take personal safety into you own hands? Why the fuck do you even bother having a nation at all if USA is that much of a failure that it cant even protects its own citizen within its own border?
    Homeland security? Ah! What a joke!!

    Well, just my 2 pennies

  351. If you register and carry properly YOU are not the one people should be worried about! Criminals don't register or carry openly. ..I think it's a safe way to tell the good from the bad!!?? Just sayin 😉 Then when you walk out without paying and the cops show up at your home from tracking your license plate charging you with theft or larcen you then become the bad guy right?¿ Good plan, lets see how that works out for all of you trying to help take our rights away.

  352. Anonymous says:

    To AnonymousJuly 1, 2014 at 6:52 AM: Classic misuse of statistics, sir. Perhaps you can tell us our odds of being killed by a Apache attack helicopter? Quite small I imagine; I guess we should have no fear then if one hovers over our home as we mow the grass and put away the groceries hmmm?

  353. Anonymous says:

    It's not the inanimate objects (guns) we're afraid of. It's the zealotry of the carrier that we fear. I don't fear a gun when it's locked up and securely put away. I don't fear a gun when its not loaded. I fear people who think they have the right to intimidate me or “protect” me from harm where none exists. If a bad guy with a gun comes into McDonald's or Dunkin' Donuts while I'm there, he probably wants cash from the register. He'll get it and most likely be on his way because most establishments are advised to comply with the bad guy for the safety of all. I don't need an untrained civilian vigilante upping the ante or escalating a situation that will likely be terrifying but survivable.

  354. Anonymous says:

    I agree. It's both a pro-active and simple solution.

  355. Anonymous says:

    Why is it that everyone seems to have to take it to an extreme one way or the other? Yes people have a right to own guns. For hunting, shooting sports, and protection in some situations that are proven to be dangerous guns make sense. The fact is though that having a gun around, for what ever reason, dramatically increases the likely hood of some one being shot. Does anyone really think allowing guns in bars, with people drinking, and typically making bad decisions is a good idea?. People that feel they have to make a point by bringing guns to everyday reasonably safe locations are making it more likely that innocent people will be shot. If the restaurant I am in is being robed I would rather not have some un trained guy with a gun try to handle the situation. I would rather witness a robbery than be in the middle of a gun battle. I also feel that if someone walks in with an assault rifle over the shoulder, or any other gun for that matter I am completely justified in leaving the premises. There is no way for me to tell their intentions, or if someone else will confront them and things will escalate. The chance of bullets flying may only be one in one thousand but that is still a risk that I, an innocent by stander should have to take. This doesn't mean I am trying to get a free meal, I am more than happy to pay, and always do when I dont feel my life is potentially being threatened. Maybe I will be arrested, I doubt it, but go right ahead. No jury will convict me of looking out for my own life while I my self put no one else's safety on the line. The “good guy” with the gun who thinks he is acting in everyones defense is the one who might have his gun go off accidentally, or use bad judgement “protecting” us from some threat, or decide that he is going to win an argument because the gun says he can. If the restaurant looses a few dollars then maybe the restaurant will figure out that allowing guns in their private establishment is bad for business.

  356. Anonymous says:

    interesting. I just ran the numbers of gun owners and car owners in the U.S. It matched up perfectly (if it is true as a previous commenter said that you are 367% more likely to be killed by a gun than a car). There are 370% more car owners in the us than gun owners. Cars and guns kill equally. Guess we should make every gun owner get a license which they renew with a test every so often and register their guns yearly, just like cars. Then there is the issue of liability gun insurance…

  357. Anonymous says:

    Why is it that you feel it is necessary to carry a weapon of any kind if not out of fear of others? You say you only use your gun for target practice, yet there are no targets at a restaurant, so why should you bring your gun with you if you don't intend to use it? Do you bring other things into the restaurant with you that you don't intend to use while you are there? You say that people who are afraid of you when you openly carry your gun are being irrational and that you are only doing this to protect your 2nd amendment rights. Why is the 2nd Amendment more important to you than any of the other thirty-one? Why don't you do something publicly about the 6th Amendment or the 8th or the 27th Amendment? Perhaps these people, who are afraid when you walk in with your gun and say something about it are exercising their right to the 1st Amendment? They have the right to say they don't want guns around when they are eating a meal. They have the right to say they are leaving the restaurant because some inconsiderate, fearful, irrational person brought a gun in to the restaurant. You can bring your gun because you are afraid and the rest of the people can be afraid and leave. That's reality.

  358. Anonymous says:

    Hmm, “liberalism is a cancer that must be cut out”… Try that with this liberal, and I bet I can shoot better and faster than you, and I also am quite capable of ripping your guts out with a sword—and I'm just a girl. Don't assume.
    That said, I have been very respectful of a bar that asked me to leave when my basrbarian swordswoman halloween costume with a great big very real sword was “making the other patrons nervous.” I went and put the big-ass sword in the car, and respected them.
    Oh, but right, I'm not entitled to respect, myself, because I'm a liberal. And a woman. And someone who knows I may someday have to defend myself from the likes of you, so I've learned how.
    And also smart enough not to leave an identity you can use to find and harass me, btw.

  359. Jim says:

    It is difficult to try to carry on a conversation with someone who posts as Anonymous. Unless we are to assume that all of the posts labeled “Anonymous” are from the same person, we can't refer back to any of their previous posts nor get any sense of continuity. If you don't want to take credit/blame for your posts, why not just choose a pseudonym or post as “Anonymous A”; anything to link all of your posts to one person.

  360. Anonymous says:

    After you've called the police, remember to pull the fire alarm on the way out.

  361. Anonymous says:

    I wonder how the shoot first ask questions later policeman are going to affect this trend?

  362. Anonymous says:

    I'm curious…so if I'm in a restaurant, I have a permit to conceal and carry and I do what every bit of my defensive self would do by getting my family as far away from an assault rifle in a public space, then pull my own weapon and point it at the individual with the assault weapon until a time as a waiter can come and take my card, run it then bring me the receipt to sign all while I defensively point my gun at a stranger holding an assault rifle in a restaurant, is it cool for everyone else to go ahead and ignore whats going on as we're all within our rights? Am I just plain “wrong” to be defensive for my family in the presence of a stranger with an assault rifle. I sure as heck do my best to say hi and bye to my family when my wife's cousin shows up to Thanksgiving with a pocket full of bullets and his assault rifle, cause I know he's crazy.

  363. Anonymous says:

    I definitely don't agree with the open carry laws, but I also think that not engaging in conversation with its supporters and instead actually removing any sort of discourse on the topic by simply throwing your things down and leaving is misguided and wont solve much.

  364. Anonymous says:

    to the anonymous on July 4th who says his gun(target rifle) will never shoot a bullet towards a person, then what the fuck is the purpose for caring? The only thing that I can figure is that your a fucking moron.

  365. Anonymous says:

    When my dad taught me how to shoot when I was a child — barely 9 years old, the first thing he got through my head was that

    If I had even dreamed of behaving like these open carry people, my dad would have taken my rifle away from me, and for good reason — these people are playing with guns as toys, and they are behaving as if they're afraid that their parents will take their toys away from them. I think their parents should, until they can show enough maturity to handle a firearm.

  366. Anonymous says:

    My ohhhh my. Eat at a restaurant and leave when you see an open carry. All of you who agree should do the exact same next time a police officer pulls you over for a speeding violation or fix it ticket. Your probobly stupid enough to do it if you believe what this mis-guided individuals story

  367. Anonymous says:

    I've got my share of tactical weapons but I don't take them to the Target store, because I'm not an idiot. For the people who think it's a great idea to just simply leave without paying, here is a scenario. You (especially if you are black) attempt to leave, the employee yells, “Stop that man. He didn't pay!” and one of these idiots who watched too much shoot 'em up YouTube videos SHOOTS YOU IN THE HEAD!

  368. Anonymous says:

    A lot of people condemn you for openly carrying yet 100% of them would consider you a hero for saving their lives with the same weapon they so blatantly judged you with.

  369. Anonymous says:

    They've exploited a well-intentioned law for the sake of their own hubris and glaring personal insecurities. I have a carry license and I'm definitely not anti-gun, but I'm also for whichever regulations are necessary to prevent fringe extremists from terrorizing ordinary people and their families.

    Anyone that carries a gun must possess both discretion as well as respect for weapons in general. These people have zero sensibility as it relates to the social implications of their actions. It's reasonable to call into question their thought process as well as their overall mental faculties.

    Owning a gun is a responsibility, not a joke. It requires character, training, and maturity. These people exhibit none of those traits.

  370. Anonymous says:

    I figure there are two good options…. 1) run screaming (as if afraid). 2) use cell phone video camera and record every motion they make.
    either option works best if everyone in the area does it.

  371. Anonymous says:

    I am waiting to see groups of minorities practice open carry. that should be fun.

  372. Anonymous says:

    Most murders are initiated by arguments. When people with guns are involved in arguments, the likelihood of someone being shot is greater. The only solution is to ban weapons. It worked in Australia. It lowered murder and suicide rates significantly

  373. Anonymous says:

    I think not knowing a person and their intent is a very valid concern. Scenario I, me, the person typing this, walks into a starbuck carrying a semi automatic and a clip in my pocket. You know nothing about me, but there is something you should know about me. I see my fellow gun slingers, yeah we carry guns for no “good” reason. It startling, its attractive -like smoking cigarettes- until I shoot everyone with a gun in the coffee shop. How could I do this? You can't react fast enough unless you have been trained to do so and practice it daily. You will die grabbing your gun and if you get to it you will probably shoot the nearest person to you. Unlike everyone around you diving to the floor you will be fumbling for that gun that just got you killed or you get to it and kill the person you were having coffee with. Now, that thing you don't know about me. I was diagnosed schizophrenic 6 years ago and yes I can buy guns like anyone else. I know first hand what its like to lose the understanding of what reality is, I know what delusions are, and at that time a person cannot see their way out of it and I was clinically “sane” for 30 years, until then. I didn't see it coming, the problem with your thoughts is that you always assume they are normal and right. Until I was told, I didn't know that anything was wrong with me. I literally snapped and even if I couldn't buy firearms as a mentally ill person, well I wasn't mentally ill until after I snapped and got diagnosed SEVERAL MONTHS later. If I had a firearm at that time I can honestly say I don't know who would've died. But why the hell not it's a right! right?

    The author is right, EVERYONE should run, leave the building instantly, or do what I would do walk up to the person and say, “What's that for? Zee Germans?”.

  374. Anonymous says:

    I would too. I've got kids. I don't have the time to wonder or worry about these people. I don't want to be around them. I'd just get out. Its interesting that they're so offended by that fact.

    That said, I think the vast majority of the people packing in your local home depot are carrying concealed weapons. At least, that's what my relatives do. I'd leave if I knew one of them was in the store as well.

  375. EverGreen says:

    60% of gun related deaths in this country are suicides. That's a bit over 15,000. That's a lot of people with guns who are in fact psychologically unstable.

    People make this comparison all the time about cars “killing more people than guns” right after they point out that “guns don't kill people.”

    This is true. Guns don't kill people. Unstable idiots with guns kill people. Of the average 35,000 deaths per year caused by motor vehicle, in the states it's around 300 that aren't an accident.

    Of the average 30,000 per year caused by gunshot wounds, less than 1,000 of them ARE an accident.

    If we made people insure damages done by their firearms, pass psychological tests, license them based on proving their knowledge of proper procedure, reserved the ability to stop and check for documentation of this license, and the majority of gun deaths were accidents, it might be a valid comparison.

  376. Jeff Hall says:

    Then post a sign saying you allow men with guns service. We will not be buying from you. Lol. Have fun with your business.

  377. Jeff Hall says:

    Bullets fly faster than observation. I'll err on the side of caution.

  378. Jeff Hall says:

    I'm pro guns, but you are obviously a monkey that relies on slurs to prove your point. Your gun should be taken away and replaced with a special helmet.

  379. Jeff Hall says:

    geektinker. there are concealed permits that handle that scenario just fine. If you want to open carry around me, I offer this compromise. Every open carry nut job that wants to offend me must first inhale deep as I rip a big nasty fart into their nostrils. I would consider the offense equal under those terms. I don't take kindly to other fault filled humans with toys of destruction that can kill me on a whim. Inhale deep, fart breather.

  380. Jeff Hall says:

    You both should move to Afghanistan and join al-queda. You'd fit in perfectly as gun toting monkeys there. You would probably find a boss that would bring you to 70 virgins in the afterlife.

  381. Jeff Hall says:

    Nothing says terrorist like toting weapons of destruction in a family environment.

  382. Jeff Hall says:

    Walking into a place where people are eating food in a family environment is a crime of humanity. Inhale deep, fart swallower.

  383. Jeff Hall says:

    People who want to eat in safety are a threat to society? I'd tell you to breathe deep to inhale my nastiest of farts, but I think your head lives in your ass already.

  384. Jeff Hall says:

    This is a small minority. But still, it is a shame. Can I move to your country?

  385. Jeff Hall says:

    What you do with your sexual fetishes are up to you.

  386. Jeff Hall says:

    Is asking people not to carry assault weapons openly in family environments really stripping your rights to bear arms? If you think so, then you shouldn't have a gun. Or move to Afghanistan, where gun laws suit you much more. You could fit in well with al-queda.

  387. Jeff Hall says:

    A gun owner becomes a threat within milliseconds of when he decides to be a threat if he's trained. Obviously, you aren't trained. I don't take kindly to retards thinking they should open carry tools of destruction to where I want to eat in peace.

  388. Jeff Hall says:

    Well spoken.

  389. Jeff Hall says:

    Murder over a meal? I won't say anymore.

  390. Jeff Hall says:

    Officers take oaths. Nut jobs want to be famous.

  391. Jeff Hall says:

    So you've never heard news of kids or adults that open carried into a school or mall?

  392. Jeff Hall says:

    Well spoken, my French friend.

  393. Jeff Hall says:

    Then stay at home and leave us sane people in peace.

  394. Jeff Hall says:

    Carrying assault rifles to a family environment is something that happens in Afghanistan. Just move there and join al-queda. You'll feel at home. You'll even get 70 virgins upon your glorious demise.

  395. Anonymous says:

    Hate to break it to you dude, but that IS the job you were hired to do.

  396. Andrew Searles says:

    You people are blinded by ignorance. You automatically assume anyone who is open carrying is a direct threat to your life. The comment replacing open carry supporters with a racial slur was spot on. You are discriminating as we did in the old days. Just a different target. People are so set in and blinded by “im right so I can do whatever and lay blame on someone else!” When will you people learn that just because someone believes in the right to open carry doesnt mean they are right or wrong. Would you equally attack someone openly displaying their belief in the god of their choice? I remember a time when only the military and police had guns. It was called Nazi Germany. I open carry as often as I can. I don't do it to scare people or make them feel uncomfortable. I served my time overseas as a Marine and I've been trained with the use of a gun. It can be made to be a bad thing or a good thing. If someone gets beat with a baseball bat does that mean we should ban baseball? There have been many times I have been asked to hang around some one outside a grocery store because someone was following them and they are scared. I stopped the beating of a gas station employee by two guys, not by yelling stop thats illegal, but merely the sight of a firearm that was never drawn. To blatantly attack someone because their beliefs are different than yours is plain and simply wrong. I dont believe guns should be banned and I am pro gun but I wont go out and attack an anti gun activist based on the fact he has a different belief than me. Everyone that says run away or youll die are the ones trying to create the fears in others. I am not a bad person because I carry a gun. Open your eyes people. Stop being so narrow minded.

  397. Anonymous says:

    I keep seeing comments along the lines of “Statistically more people are stabbed yearly than shot in America.” When I actually look up statistics, say the CDC it always shows more people in the US die from gun shots than die from stabbings. This leads me to conclude the people quoting this erroneous information are also counting every time someone cuts them self with a sharp object or perhaps they're talking out their ass! Either way it adds little to the conversation to make stuff up. Just because you saw a meme on FB doesn't mean it's true.

  398. Anonymous says:

    So in the UK it's been a while since anyone went postal in a school. But when it did happen there were two noteworthy cases. One did a lot of damage with a machete, the other killed a lot of people with a gun.
    Both were twisted bastards with evil intent, but the one with the more efficient killing machine caused the most harm.

    John H.

  399. Anonymous says:

    Wonder what the good people of Texas would think if instead of pretty blonde women toting guns round their towns it was large gangs, say the Angels, or the Crips or the Latin Kings or any such.

    John H

  400. Anonymous says:

    “My proposal is as follows: we should all leave. Immediately. Leave the food on the table in the restaurant. Leave the groceries in the cart, in the aisle. Stop talking or engaging in the exchange. Just leave, unceremoniously, and fast.

    But here is the key part: don’t pay. Stopping to pay in the presence of a person with a gun means risking your and your loved ones’ lives; money shouldn’t trump this. It doesn’t matter if you ate the meal. It doesn’t matter if you’ve just received food from the deli counter that can’t be resold. It doesn’t matter if you just got a haircut. Leave. If the business loses money, so be it. They can make the activists pay.”

    So should we do this when a Muslim walks in wearing a hijab or a burqa? After all, there is no way of telling a good Muslim from a terrorist Muslim until she is blowing people up. Should the Muslims then be forced to pay for your meal? Liberals sound just like bigoted conservatives when they start talking about chitting on gun rights.

  401. Anonymous says:

    I would suggest that every guy just pulls their dick out and waves it around. That's clearly what OC folks are doing when they walk around a public with their big rifles hanging out. Makes em feel good and powerful.

  402. Anonymous says:

    I was actually shocked, in my most recent hospital orientation where I work, the instructions for a “code silver” aka an active shooter, we are supposed to drop everything, abandon our patients and get out. Reason behind it is that we are simply more potential victims if we stay and we can't help our patients if we're dead.

  403. Anonymous says:

    River, I have to point out you misuse of statistics inference. If you want to compare the likelihood of being kill by a car or a gun, you have to use conditional probability no global probability (as it was used to come up with the number you are showing). There is a difference in between the number of guns and the number of cars in the US. A question that makes more sense is: how likely is for you to die “given that” there is a car (or gun) involved in the incident.

  404. Anonymous says:

    We are told not to judge ALL Muslims based on the acts of a few extremists, yet ALL gun owners are judged based on the actions of a few. I live in an open carry state, and around here, people hardly look twice at a person carrying. I personally have a concealed carry permit, meaning I have passed a background check, taken a firearms safety course, and paid my state for all of this.

  405. Anonymous says:

    “Just leave.” As in leave the country. I did. I love America and I love being American, but until they change their gun and healthcare laws, I'm only going to visit. I've lived in what most American's consider “dangerous” countries in my 6 years of living abroad, but the only place where I've been mugged at gunpoint was in America. Twice. Once in Columbus, Ohio and once in Chicago. I'll just visit the USA from now on. I miss the 'States and I still cheer them on, but it's just not worth it. I wouldn't want to raise children in such a place. It's a shame, too, because there are so many fantastic things about American culture. I'm just sick of having a loaded gun pointed at my head by an unemployed person who wants a few bucks and who is willing to risk getting a felony (or, you know, KILLING ME) for it. Two times was enough for me. That's the other part of gun control: non-murder statistics. So the fact that a person put a loaded gun to my head (two different Americans, actually) but didn't kill me means that my statistics aren't worthy? Have you ever been mugged? Do you know what that feels like? You don't recover. You never, ever mentally recover. Ever. You lose all faith in humanity. You lose all faith in the concept of money and greed, have and have-not. So sorry it's not murder, so we won't bother to talk about it. Seriously, America, you're better than this. I love my home country and I really want to return, but I won't until I feel safe. Gun control is about so much more than whether or not cars or guns kill more people. It's about putting in check an instrument that is used to hurt, break, or kill things. Background checks and psychological checks would be at least a start. Time to actually get some gun control, please. My home country that is supposedly modern and civilized, please, the joke is over, it's time to get actual, modern, 21st century laws.

    After that I'll come home. I'm looking forward to throwing a big American barbeque in celebration. Till then, it's crappy foreign food for me. Heck, it beats NOT HAVING GUN CONTROL! I can't believe we're still having a discussion about this… Silly home country…

  406. Texas TopCat says:

    Your numbers quoted are wrong. The best estimate is 2.5 million violent crimes are prevented by a person with a gun every year.
    Guns stop crime xx million times a year (CDC Report)
    (Addtional stats)

  407. Texas TopCat says:

    Well, since there is no threat to the gun carrier by the thief, in Texas that would not be justification to use deadly force. However, the citizen can use reasonable force to detain the thief until police arrive and take them into custody.

  408. Texas TopCat says:

    “a person with a pocket knife” and cops pulling guns on them'
    A person with a knife from 20 feet away can kill you in less than 2 seconds.
    So, the cops should have drew their weapons. If the person was in the same room then opportunity and ability to kill has been established, Should any indication of intent to harm be present, the police or citizen is justified to STOP the threat using force, including deadly force.

  409. Texas TopCat says:

    ” they got the CDC banned from studying gun violence for 17 years” –
    “gun violence” is necessary and positive in the vast majority of cases, since “gun violence” or the “threat of gun violence” prevents an estimated 2.5 million violent crimes every year. So, if you want to make the US safer you need to not use the term “gun violence” as negative and do things to reduce “criminal violence”. Suggestions would be to remove “No Gun Zones” and have every school include Gun training.
    The CDC funding was removed for political anti-gun articles that were not factual or balanced. If Bloomberg want to generate “false studies and false advertising then he should pay for it.
    “None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”

  410. Texas TopCat says:

    Making false police reports is a serious crime. Also, attempting to get others to commit serious crimes is also a crime.
    These people that make such calls may need to spend some quality time as a guest of our prison system.

  411. Texas TopCat says:

    Calling names like “ammosexuals” says a lot about your morals. The facts are that no one has been harmed in any of these demonstrations and will never be harmed as part of the OCT actions. Gun carriers commit virtually no crime, as shown by the stats on Texas Department of Public Safety CHL web site.

    Since Police/Government have no duty or responsibility to protect any individual, just exactly who do you think has the responsibility to protect you? What tools and training do you think will be necessary for that responsibility?

  412. Anonymous says:

    If a concealed-carry feels threatened and shoots an open-carry in response to this gut reaction, all he has to say is “it looked like he was going for his weapon”, and it becomes a matter of self-defense; this happens with police all the time. The individual judge may decide against the claim, but it is absolutely a legitimate one, especially in “stand-your-ground” states.

    As the article notes, one has no actual idea as to what the intent of the open-carry individual is, excepting that he or she has intentionally brought a tool specifically designed for killing immediately, at range, and with more far force than a human can muster themselves, into the establishment, and has it out in the open, where it can be used quickly. Any little move by that person which contacts or shifts the open-carried weapon could be legitimately seen as a threat to all present. As one cannot stop to discuss in committee in threat situations, and tensions are automatically high in the presence of firearms, fear for one's life can always be argued as a defense for shooting OC individuals. The specific judge may decide against them, but will have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the shooter was not in fear of his life, and that would be an uphill battle.

    As to those claiming a non-paying meal-leaver will be fined or charged, this is unlikely. No sane judge will penalize individuals for leaving the presence of brandished firearms ASAP. The fleeing individuals are well within their rights to leave due to the inherent fear induced; saying otherwise is actually a form of holding them hostage, and would be “shot down” in court fairly quickly.

    Put simply, open-carry marches are unlikely to succeed, as allowing OC would create so many after-the-fact legal headaches that police and politicians are unlikely to allow it to transpire..

  413. Anonymous says:

    Molon Labe….get over it.

  414. The steak knife example is just goofy. If you're in a restaurant, the steak knife is completely in context, not out of place. Not to mention, most steak knives are not the best stabbing weapons. But beyond that, a person walking into the same restaurant with a semi-automatic rifle strapped to his back has ZERO reason to be carrying this weapon, other than a) to intimidate and freak people out or b) to shoot people. So, either a dick or a bad guy. I don't want to be around either type.

  415. Anonymous says:

    There have been 2 gun incidents on my block in the last year..I live in a town of 20000 which is very high per capita…it can be a lot more dangerous than you imagine. Not less than twice a week are the police in my neighborhood.

  416. Bobbye says:

    Anonymous wrote that “ignorance is bliss.” He/she must be a very happy person!

  417. Steve M. says:

    “Gun people aren't 'warped' ” Really? Just read their comments here. Paranoid, power-needy, racist. narcissist, inability to think rationally…

  418. Anonymous says:

    hey DIPSHIT if you walk into my kid's school brandishing a 9″ chef knife i'm sure as hell going to have a problem with it

    that's where your analogy shows you to be stupid. giant knives stay where they belong: in the kitchen. if you stroll up to me at Sears waving a giant knife i am going to assume you're violent.

  419. Anonymous says:

    Please let's put this knife argument to rest. “If a person walks into a restaurant, sits down to eat, and slowly pulls their steak knife from their napkin do you get up and leave? ” NO. The steak knife serves a legitimate and logical function at the restaurant. Guns do not or do you typically empty a clip into your steak to cut it? Now if this Patron gets up with the steak knife in a threatening manner then yes I leave. I'll also save you time with your rebuttal – “but the gun owners aren't holding their guns in a threatening manner?” Well it's simple, I can likely outrun a man armed with a steak knife but I can't outrun a bullet, so when someone I don't know walks in brandishing an assault rifle my best chance is to leave sooner rather than later.

  420. Anonymous says:

    A great aspect of a forum such as PQED is that all contributors are exercising their First Amendment Right, albeit in numerous cases with a lack of mutual respect. Clearly there is disagreement and expression of strongly held beliefs. I submit that you should not leave an establishment anywhere without paying… instead, if you oppose open carry, look for the “No Fire Arms” symbol on the entryway door. If it is not present, don't patronize the establishment and let the manager know why. There are many more people who do not openly carry firearms than there are those who do, although some may not oppose others from doing so. Eventually, by “voting” with your wallet, a business may get the message. If enough people oppose open carry in this way, businesses may alter their policy. If they do not, the business owner can simply exercise their right to support open carry and hope there are sufficient numbers of open carry supporters to keep their business alive.

  421. Anonymous says:

    Perfectly fine. They are professionally trained and evaluated regularly and if they dont pass, their career choice is in jeopardy,

  422. Anonymous says:

    That's a tough question. I don't think we have open carry here. My gut
    reaction would be flight. If I don't have a gun I can't defend myself or
    others. I would then go back at another time and reimburse the restaurant
    (the grocery store could just re-shelve the stuff in my cart). It would be
    very difficult for a store to try and make the gun carriers pay…
    And yes, we do live in a crazy world!

  423. Mike S. says:

    I am not at all anti-gun. But I made an advance decision on what I would do when the open-carry crowd was meeting in Starbucks here in the Seattle area. I see someone with a gun and I just leave. I'm not stopping to say anything to anyone except people I am with and I am sure not paying my bill on the way out. Once I am in a safe place, I am calling 9-1-1 and reporting a person or people with guns inside a business, on the street or whatever. I am not elaborating or answering questions from a dispatcher on what I imagine their purpose, intent or anything else to be, just what I saw. There are people with guns at such and such a place. If you cops don't want to some and see what's going on, that's your call. I've done my part. See ya. If the business is one I like to frequent, when the dust settles I will call and see if their policy is to allow open-carry or if they just happened to get victimized on the day I was there. If they support open carry, I will never go back there.

  424. Anonymous says:

    following this logic we should all do the same when any Muslim walks into a room because everyone of them is a terrorist right? This makes the same amount of sense. If the “gun control activists” would stop and realize we have all the laws in place that we need, all that really needs to happen is enforcement of the existing laws, and proper punishment for breaing the law

  425. Anonymous says:

    You know what? When I'm in a store or restaurant, I simply don't want you and your rifle sharing the same space with me. I don't want to be surrounded by openly armed people at that time, period.

    I'm not afraid of you, I believe you aren't intending to hurt anyone, but if you can't understand why people are uncomfortable around public displays of firearms, you're damaging your cause far more than helping it.