" Gunpowder penetrates brain, impairs cognitive capabilities. Film at 11:00. "
This is The Pit, pal.
—Looking around— Hey, lookeehere. I’m not alone.
[Quote=Bullitt]
Yeah, I lost track of that. Thanks.
ETA: Now I get Vinyl’s post. I’m having a slow moment.
[/quote]
Game Set Match. See, it’s all pretty funny. Except for the part where you’re allowed to kill people with your firearm and you cannot comprehend the inner workings of an Internet message board.
It is illegal to carry a gun while intoxicated everywhere I have heard of. Its one of the reasons i don’t really like hunting… lots of waiting, no alcohol and surpirsingly little chit chat. I am surprised that being drunk while carrying a gun is legal in Michigan. Heck it only recently became legal to carry a gun into a restaurant where alcohol is being served in Virginia.
So, what’s a blind shooter to do if they are sufficiently threatened to draw their weapon? Do they yell out, LOUDLY,
“Excuse me, but is there anyone else in my line of fire and also within 200 yards of me? Because if you are, I need to pull the trigger now, and you best should move!” ???
ETA: And, blind people are different than most of the rest of the public. (Intending to be factual, and not intending to call out the disability.)
It may well be illegal to carry when drunk in Michigan and/or other states.
The problem is, how do the police know he’s drunk? Until they can give him a field sobriety test, he’s just a guy with a gun who’s acting erratically. But that’s legal as church on Sunday. So apparently they can’t say, “drop the gun or we shoot” because he’s got every right to carry the gun. And until he drops the gun, as far as they know, he’s a perfectly sober obnoxious idiot. Catch-22!
Thats pretty retarded. The ADA doesn’t prevent the government from preventing the blind operation of motor vehicles, I don’t see why it would prevent the blind operation of a gun.
They can stop and question anyone they want on suspicion of breaking the law. What they probably wanted to avoid was confronting a drunk with a gun.
It all comes down to the same thing: where open carry is legal, you will have situations such as these that are perfectly legal but have to be taken seriously as threats to life and limb, to the extent of closing streets and shooing everyone inside.
This is what happens when you make it legal for people to carry death sticks around in public.
Reading the article, the cops asked him to put down his weapon. You are obligated to comply with that order in Michigan. So it seems he was breaking the law when he refused to surrender his weapon. http://mscrgo.org/
Well, there is open carry and there is brandishing. This guys sounds like he had crossed the line into brandishing.
On June 19th, 1865, a Union general landed in Galveston to announce (1) the war was over, (2) the Union had won, and (3) the Emancipation Proclamation had freed the slaves. Texas slavemasters had kept their “property” ignorant of that news. Since then, Juneteenth has been celebrated by African Americans in Texas–& some in other parts of the country.
The bold freedom fighters behind this travesty are bravely posing in front of Lee’s office. But not the one in the Fifth Ward! It’s the one on 19th Street, in the Heights. Where the diversity is of a much paler tone…
It isn’t a very precise line, though, is it? And it sounds like people had good reason to be afraid of this idiot, regardless of whether he stayed on the ‘good’ side of the line between open carry and brandishing.
Hence the quotes around ‘good.’ To the rest of us, there’s scarcely a difference - maybe it takes the open carrier a fraction of a second longer than the brandisher to kill someone. It’s a distinction without a difference.
Its clear enough that a cop can stop you and tell you to surrender your weapon pretty much whenever the fuck he wants around here and anyone that open carries is putting himself at the mercy of every cop that sees him and I’m in a pretty pro-gun state.
Around here, you might be brandishing simply by letting the silhouette of your gun show through your shirt. displaying a holstered weapon might be brandishing. If you’ve got a gun in your hand, cops can definitely get you for brandishing.
And how many more seconds do you think it takes for a concealed carrier to shoot someone?
I don’t oppose live fire requirements but I don’t see why I should oppose a “shall issue” law that doesn’t have one. My state doesn’t require live fire and we are not awash in blind conceal carry holders.
they weren’t idiots. One of the mothers is quoted as feeling that her “rights are being infringed upon.” But these mothers have no right whatsoever to carry, or even to enter, the private property of a Target store. Armed protesters are bad enough to my sensibilities (even accompanied by children), but ones who don’t even know what they are protesting for inspire no confidence at all.
They weren’t being hypocritical. They are trying to “normalize” open carry by showing us it’s perfectly safe. So why are they using unloaded guns for this demonstration? Could it be that they don’t want to carry loaded weapons around their own children?
They weren’t violating gun-safety common sense. Third picture in the article, the woman in the green shirt has lost control of the rifle on her back. It is no longer pointing at the ceiling or floor; it’s pointing at just the right height to catch her daughter clean in the chest.
The woman in the third picture is the one whose magazine well is most clearly empty. I can’t really tell for sure with the other two. Considering how quickly you can put a magazine in a magazine well, I don’t see why you would want to carry loaded unholstered weapons. The woman in the faded jeans and blue t shirt in the third picture has a one point sling and those don’t ride up the way the other one does (I usually keep the rifle in across my front if I am using a two point sling (and frankly I hardly ever use a sling because I hardly ever carry a rifle outside of a gun range)).