SHOCKING AUDIO: Philadelphia Police violate rights of open carrier at gunpoint

[AGRP]

This reminds me of what happened to the guy at Costco. There was a point when it sounded like if he moved an inch that they would have killed him.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-vUYeJXSrA

[Carehn]

Hope he sues this shit out of him.

[Standing Like A Rock]

Repeat thread, but I thought it needed more attention anyways.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?284816-SHOCKING-AUDIO-Philadelphia-Police-violate-rights-of-open-carrier-at-gunpoint

[aGameOfThrones]

Damn! That pirate was ignorant as fuck. Who are the terrorist again?

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Is there any question anymore that police are a domestic occupying army?

[RCA]

So, was it legal for him to open carry or not?

[aGameOfThrones]

So, was it legal for him to open carry or not?


Let's see:

§ 6108. Carrying firearms on public streets or public property in Philadelphia.

No person shall carry a firearm, rifle or shotgun at any time upon the public streets or upon any public property in a city of the first class unless:
such person is licensed to carry a firearm; orsuch person is exempt from licensing under section 6106(b) of this title (relating to firearms not to be carried without a license).

ADVISORY NOTE: Like in a place of declared emergency under §6107, in a City of First Class, a license under §6109 or exception under §6106(b) is required to be able to carry openly on foot.

[aGameOfThrones]

§ 6109. Licenses.

Purpose of license. -- A license to carry a firearm shall be for the purpose of carrying a firearm concealed on or about one's person or in a vehicle throughout this Commonwealth.

[ronpaulitician]

Not sure how accurate this is:
http://paopencarry.org/open-carry-questions-answers#1 (http://paopencarry.org/open-carry-questions-answers#1l)

1.Is open carry legal in PA?
Answer: Yes, with some restrictions.

Anyone whom can legally own a firearm in the commonwealth can openly carry, on foot, with the exception of court facilities, federal buildings, motor vehicles and cities of the first class (Philadelphia)

Those person possessing a valid License to Carry Firearms are also permitted to carry openly (or concealed) while in a vehicle and in cities of the first class.

[aGameOfThrones]

Not sure how accurate this is:
http://paopencarry.org/open-carry-questions-answers#1 (http://paopencarry.org/open-carry-questions-answers#1l)

See post 7 and 8.

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

these officers seem to have some anger issues

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

I do gotta respect the fact that the officers figured out that he had a tape recorder and allowed him to continue recording.

[r3voLt]

A video to further explain open carry to those who may not be familiar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aElZkvsh_6o

[puppetmaster]

these officers seem to have some anger issues

Thats because a large amount of steriod use in the force.

[Paul Revered]

I found this. I can't attest to it's veracity; and I'm not a lawyer; but it's all over the web.

===================
PPD CHANGES DIRECTIVE 137 "FIREARMS"-- RECOGNIZING RIGHT TO OPEN CARRY IN PHILADELPHIA
guyferg's picture
guyferg Posted at 00:17 on Wed, 10/06/2010

On the heels of fellow board member Viper's illegal gun confiscation on South Street several weeks ago, the PPD has sent out the following directive change to ALL personnel. It was sent on 9/22/10. The change results from a complaint filed by Viper contesting the stop and confiscation. The previous version of the directive stated open carry was not allowed in Philadelphia, a direct contradiction with STATE LAW.

Under the threat of a lawsuit, the city and the PPD were forced to change the directive. The text is below for your convenience. Before another "he forged that fax, he played cops and gun nuts at his computer, some furry animal made that up", or any other Oliver Stone type conspiracy accusation comes up, all you have to do is ask ANY officer about hearing this read at roll call for three straight days, or the fact that the officers had to sign and acknowledge the contents of the message.

You can also fill out a right to know request and the PPD will have to send you a copy of the directive for free, right to your doorstep.

So who is preparing the crow for po-po 666 to eat?????

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GENERAL: 1272 09/22/10 12:53:20

TO : ALL COMMANDING OFFICERS / DEPARTMENT HEADS
SUBJECT : FIREARM OPEN CARRY LAW IN PHILADELPHIA

1. DIRECTIVE 137, ENTITLED “FIREARMS” IS BEING UPDATED
CONCERNING THE PENNSYLVANIA OPEN CARRY LAWS
REGARDING THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA. THIS TELETYPE
REFLECTS THE NEW POLICY AS IT WILL APPEAR IN THE
DIRECTIVE.

2. ALL OFFICERS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT PENNSYLVANIA IS
CONSIDERED AN “OPEN CARRY STATE” WITH THE EXCEPTION OF
PHILADELPHIA. IT IS IMPORTANT TO DEFINE A FEW TERMS USED,
WHICH ARE AS FOLLOWS:

“OPEN CARRY” REFERS TO THE ACT OF OPENLY AND VISIBLY
CARRYING A FIREARM ON ONE’S PERSON.

“OPEN CARRY STATE” REFERS TO A STATE THAT ALLOWS
PEOPLE TO OPENLY AND VISIBLY CARRY A FIREARM ON ONE’S
PERSON WITHOUT A SPECIAL LICENSE OR PERMIT.

“CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE” REFERS TO A SPECIFIC
LICENSE ISSUED TO AN INDIVIDUAL AUTHORIZING THE PERSON
TO CARRY A FIREARM CONCEALED ON HIS OR HER PERSON OR
VEHICLE.

3. IN PHILADELPHIA, UNLIKE ANY OTHER PART OF THE STATE, FOR
ANY PERSON TO LAWFULLY, OPENLY AND VISIBLY CARRY A
FIREARM, THAT PERSON MUST HAVE A CONCEALED CARRY
FIREARMS LICENSE. SO, IN PHILADELPHIA, IF A PERSON HAS A
VALID CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE, HE OR SHE CAN
LEGALLY CARRY A FIREARM EITHER OPEN AND VISIBLE OR
CONCEALED.

4. AN OFFICER ENCOUNTERING A PERSON CARRYING A FIREARM
OPENLY IN PHILADELPHIA SHOULD FOR THE SAFTEY OF PUBLIC
INVESTIGATE AS A POSSIBLE VUFA VIOLATION.

A. SINCE A SEPARATE LICENSE IS REQUIRED IN PHILADELPHIA
AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY OFFICER TO KNOW WHO DOES
AND DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE, IT
IS ENTIRELY REASONALBE FOR OFFICERS TO TEMPORARILY
DETAIN AND INVESTIGATE ANY INDIVIDUAL CARRYING A
FIREARM EXPOSED TO DETERMINE IF THE PERSON IS
OPERATING WITH THE LAW.

B. IMMEDIATLEY SEIZE ANY FIREARMS FOR OFFICER SAFETY
DURING THE STOP AND UNLOAD THE FIREARMS IF POSSIBLE,
BUT ONLY IF IT CAN BE DONE SAFELY.

C. A 75-48A MUST BE COMPLETED AND THE BASIS FOR THE STOP
WOULD BE A “POSSIBLE VUFA VIOLATION”

D. ONCE THE OFFICER RECEIVES CONFIRMATION THAT THE
CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE IS VALID, AND THERE ARE NO
OTHER OFFENSE OR VIOLATIONS BEING INVESTIGATED,
OFFICERS SHOULD RETURN THE FIREARM AND AMMUNITION
BACK TO THE INDIVIDUAL AT THE END OF THE STOP.

E. HOWEVER, IF THE INDIVIDUAL CANNOT PRODUCE A VALID
CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE OR THE LICENSE IS NOT VALID
(I.E. EXPIRED OR REVOKED), PROBABLE CAUSE THEN EXISTS
TO ARREST THE INDIVIDUAL FOR THE VUFAVIOLATION AND
TRANSPORT THE INDIVIDUAL TO THE DIVISIONAL DETECTIVES
FOR PROCESSING. THE FIREARM AND AMMUNITION SHOULD
BE PLACED ON A PROPERTY RECEIPT (75-3) AND MARKED AS
“ EVIDENCE”. A 75-48A FOR THE INITIAL STOP MUST BE
PREPARD ALONG WITH A 75-48 FOR THE VUFA ARREST.

ALL COMMANDING OFFICERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS WILL ENSURE THAT ALL PERSONNEL UNDER THEIR COMMAND ARE MADE
AWARE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS MESSAGE BY
HAVING THE OFFICER SIGN THEIR TRAINING MATERIAL RECEIPT/RECORD. (75-578)

TO BE READ AT ROLL CALL FOR THREE CONSECUTIVE DAYS.

http://fishtown.us/node/17482

=================================
Looks like what we have here, is a failure to communicate.

[Lucille]

Vox Day: Police are violent, vulgar, ignorant scum (http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/05/police-are-violent-vulgar-ignorant-scum.html)

[archangel689]

http://forum.pafoa.org/open-carry-144/126083-arrested-philadelphia-police-open-carry.html

this the same guy?

They'll jump up their ass.

[Dr.3D]

Not sure how accurate this is:
http://paopencarry.org/open-carry-questions-answers#1 (http://paopencarry.org/open-carry-questions-answers#1l)

1.Is open carry legal in PA?
Answer: Yes, with some restrictions.

Anyone whom can legally own a firearm in the commonwealth can openly carry, on foot, with the exception of court facilities, federal buildings, motor vehicles and cities of the first class (Philadelphia)

Those person possessing a valid License to Carry Firearms are also permitted to carry openly (or concealed) while in a vehicle and in cities of the first class.

What the heck is a city of the first class? Now there are classes of cities? Are there cities of the second and third class?

[hillbilly123069]

When did this happen? Issues like this with locals needs to be attacked at the city council meetings. You stop it before it starts when the council members know you know that they are accountable for the police department.
You show up as a group like they did on the Town Hall meetings, you have the council members UNDIVIDED attention.

[Brian4Liberty]

Dup thread.

Is it in the Constitution that when a representative (officer) of the government "doesn't know who you are", that they must find out immediately and at gunpoint, and that it justifies lethal force? :rolleyes:

[Napoleon's Shadow]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BwQQSo9YX4

[cdc482]

This is a big dick fight. They are trying to prove who has a bigger dick by asserting their dominance over each other. To be fair, while the police officers were dicks, why the hell would you open-carry a gun in a public place?!

[archangel689]

To be fair, while the police officers were dicks, why the hell would you open-carry a gun in a public place?!

Not this shit again....


Carrying a concealed firearm presents to a criminal that I am unarmed. Every study I’ve ever read, not most but every study, says that criminals will avoid an armed person or home when selecting a victim. That only makes sense, right? Robbers, rapists, or carjackers might be dumb and opportunistic, but they have the same instinctual sense of self preservation we all have. Hyenas don’t attack lions to steal the gazelle the lions have just killed. It’s all about risk management; are the potential gains (a tasty gazelle dinner) worth the risks (pain and damage the lion’s teeth will cause), and does the hyena really need to test the lion to figure out the answer? No, the hyena can see the lion’s teeth and knows to stay well clear.
Deterrent Value:

When I’m carrying concealed I feel like my ‘teeth’ are hidden, and thus of no real deterrent value. If I appear unarmed then I am unarmed in the eyes of the robber, I appear as easy a target as almost anyone else out on the street. My probability of being a victim of a crime, violent or otherwise, is completely unchanged by the fact that I have hidden beneath my shirt the means to defend myself. My goal, however, is not to be a victim in the first place, remember? I don’t want to be a victim that fought back successfully and triumphed; I prefer to not be victimized at all. I recognize that there are some people who (think they) want to be victimized so they can whip out their concealed firearm and ‘surprise’ the mugger; that is, in my opinion, foolish immaturity. Concealed carry is good; it throws a wrench in the works for criminals who might see the teeming masses as a smorgasbord of financial gain. This deterrent effect is, nonetheless, indirect and often nil. At some point the thug will weigh the risks vs. the gains; is his current desperation for money/drugs/booze/gold grille greater than the gamble that one of those people might be carrying a gun? If he decides to play the odds, which helped along with surprise tip the scale in his favor, he will attack. Will his attack allow enough time for me to draw my concealed firearm to affect a defense? Maybe, but then again, maybe not.

Remember, I don’t want to be a victim and I don’t want to shoot anyone. So how do I realize both goals; or how do I make them inclusive? I can do that through open carry. By making it clear and obvious that I am armed, that I have teeth, I tip the risk scale to the point that the criminal’s gains are far outweighed by the risk. There is no ambiguity when the thug is doing his risk assessment, there’s something right there in plain sight that can quickly and painfully change or terminate his life. You may not think his life has much value, but as I mentioned before, he has the same sense of self preservation as any other living creature and to him it’s every bit as valuable as yours is to you. It would be foolish to ignore this indisputable fact when you develop your overall tactical strategy.
The Five Stages of Violent Crime

I am a firm believer in this defense theology and urge anyone who carries a firearm for protection (and even those who do not) to follow the link and read it carefully. Please, for your and your family’s sake, read that. Drill down into the hyperlinks for better explanations; absorb as much information as you can. A violent crime does not begin at the point where one person with ill intent draws a weapon or attacks another.

Crime and violence are processes that take time to develop. The attack is not the first step, the preliminary triangle must be built. There are five distinct stages that are easily identified:
1) Intent
2) Interview
3) Positioning
4) Attack
5) Reaction
First One To Be Shot:

There are some who criticize open carry and claim it will make you more of a target or ‘the first one shot’ when a robber walks into the 7-11, despite the absolute lack of credible evidence that this has ever happened. If the robber walks in and sees that you’re armed, his whole plan has encountered an unexpected variable. In bank robberies where he might expect to see an armed guard he will have already factored that possibility into his plan, but only for the armed guard, not for open or concealed carry citizens. No robber robs a bank without at least a rudimentary plan. Nevertheless, being present for a bank robbery is an extremely remote possibility for most of us regardless of our preferred method of handgun carry, so let’s go back in the 7-11. If the robber sees someone is armed he is forced to either significantly alter the plan or abort it outright. Robbing is an inherently apprehensive occupation, and one that doesn’t respond well to instant modifications. He is not prepared to commit murder when he only planned for larceny. He knows that a petty robbery will not garner the intense police manhunt a murder would. He doesn’t know if you’re an armed citizen or a police officer and isn’t going to take the time to figure it out. Either way, if someone in the 7-11 is unexpectedly armed, how many others might be similarly adorned and where might they be? Does this unexpectedly armed individual have a partner who is likewise armed nearby, someone who is watching right now? Self preservation compels him to abort the plan for one that is less risky. So we see that the logic matches the history; open carriers are not the first ones shot because it doesn’t make sense in any common street crime scenario that they would be. If your personal self protection plan emphasizes “Hollywood” style crimes over the more realistic street mugging, it might be best to stay home.
Surprise:

Probably the most common condemnation of open carry comes from the armchair tacticians who believe it’s better to have the element of surprise in a criminal encounter. Although this was touched on in the previous paragraph about deterrence, I’ll expand on it specifically here because there are some important truths you need to consider before you lean too heavily on this false support. Surprise as a defensive tactic is often based on unrealistic or ill-thought out scenarios, and seems to exist only in the minds of concealed carry firearms proponents. The circumstance where several street toughs surround and taunt you for a while before robbing you, like in some Charles Bronson movie, is not realistic; the mugger wants to get in and out as fast as possible. In most cases you will have only seconds to realize what’s happening, make a decision, and react. Imagine you’re walking along the sidewalk when two gangsta looking teenagers suddenly appear at the corner coming in the opposite direction. You have only seconds to react if their intent was to victimize you. Do you draw your concealed firearm now or wait until there’s an actual visible threat? If they are just on their way to church and you pull a gun on them, you are the criminal and you will likely forever lose your firearms rights for such a foolish action. If you don’t draw and they pull a knife or pistol when they’re just a couple steps away, your only options are draw (if you think you can) or comply. Imagine staring at the shiny blade of a knife being held by a very nervous and violent mugger, three inches from your or your wife’s throat and having to decide whether or not you have time to draw from concealment. The element of surprise may not do you any good; in fact the only surprising thing that might happen is that your concealed carry pistol gets taken along with your wallet. The thug will later get a good chuckle with his buddies about how you brought a gun to a knife fight. The simple truth is that while surprise is a monumentally superior tactical maneuver, it is exclusively an offensive action, not a defensive one. What many internet commandos call ‘defensive surprise’ is nothing more than damage control, a last ditch effort to fight your way back out of a dangerous situation. I am not aware of any army that teaches using surprise as a defense against attack. No squad of soldiers goes on patrol with their weapons hidden so that they can ‘surprise’ the enemy should they walk into an ambush.
It Will Get Stolen:

Another common criticism of open carry is that the firearm itself will be the target of theft, prompting a criminal to attack simply to get the gun from you. Like the previous example of being the first one shot in a robbery, above, this is despite the fact that there is no credible evidence it happens. It also blindly ignores the more obvious fact that anything you possess can make you the target of a crime, be it a car, a watch, or even a female companion (girlfriend, wife, or daughter). Crooks commonly steal for only one of two reasons; to get something you have that they want, or to get something that you have so they can sell it and buy something they want. I don’t claim it could never happen; just that it’s so remote a possibility that it doesn’t warrant drastic alterations to our self defense strategies. If you believe otherwise, leave your wife, children, watch, sunglasses, jewelry, and cell phone at home, hop into your Pinto wagon, and head out to do your thing. Very often, someone critical of open carry will cite some example of a uniformed police officer whose gun was taken by a violent criminal, and yes, this does indeed happen. The argument, however, breaks down when they assume the officer was targeted solely to steal his firearm. What is more likely is that the officer was targeted merely for being a police officer and the gun was stolen as a byproduct of the attack. More often, the officer’s gun is taken during the struggle to get the suspect into custody due to an entirely unrelated matter. However, let’s suppose, for argument, that a police officer really was attacked just to get his firearm. What actions did the police department take to prevent it from reoccurring? Did they demand that their officers carry concealed? No, of course not. You should, like the police, prioritize your defense strategy for the most likely threat first, and the least likely last.
It Scares People:

One other statement against open carry I hear is that it damages public perception of firearms owners, or that by carrying openly we are not being good ambassadors to the public. While there are some people who have a genuine fear of firearms, due either to some horrible past experience or anti-gun indoctrination, the majority of people are either indifferent to them or quite fascinated by them. I’ve never kept track of the dozens of fellow citizens I’ve encountered who have marveled at the idea of open carry, but I do know exactly how many have expressed displeasure at it; one. People are scared of many things for many reasons; however, pretending those things do not exist only perpetuates the fear. Someone who is disturbed by open carry is going to be every bit as disturbed by concealed carry. The only effective way to overcome a fear is to come to the intellectual realization that the phobia is based on emotion and not on fact. By being a firsthand witness that a firearm was carried responsibly and peaceably, and wasn’t being carried in the commission of a crime, one who was apprehensive about firearms discovers their fear is not fact based, but emotional. Thus, open carry can be a very effectual way of helping to overcome the emotionally based fear of the firearm. After all, you’d be much more likely to believe in ghosts if you saw one rather than if you listened to a ghost story around a campfire. In other words, we give significantly more credibility to the things we experience than we do to the things we hear. The bottom line is that this argument is made by people who don’t, cant, or haven’t carried openly; those of us who do so on a regular basis have an entirely different experience.
I'm Not Comfortable Carrying Openly:

This is really the only reasonable argument against open carry for an individual. We all have a comfort zone for any aspect of our lives and we prefer to stay within that comfort zone. We all agree that it’s better to be armed and never need the firearm than it is to need it and not have it. There is a point where concealing your firearm becomes so problematic, due to conditions like temperature or comfort, that some choose to either leave it behind or carry in such a way that it would be difficult or impossible to draw it quickly. If it takes me five or six seconds to draw my firearm from deep concealment and I had sufficient time before hand to actually do so, I would prefer to use that five or six seconds to avoid the entire encounter. I’m glad we have concealed carry laws in most of the states; it empowers and protects not only us but the general public through the offset deterrent effect. Some of us, however, choose the more direct deterrent effect of open carry.
Conclusion

No, open carry is not the be-all-end-all of self defense any more than concealed carry is. The purpose of this essay is not to convince you to carry a firearm openly, but to merely point out the reasoning I used to determine that it is often the best option for me. If you think otherwise, please feel free to write an essay of your own outlining the reasoning you used. I would suggest that you avoid the intellectual mistake of emphasizing rare or unlikely defense scenarios that many of us will never experience. I believe one should prioritize for the most likely threat, not the least likely threat. I don’t put Hollywood style bank robberies high on my threat list because I rarely go into a bank and those types of robberies are very rare themselves. I live in the most crime riddled city in the northwest; the most likely threat here is some young male with a knife or gun trying to carjack me or mug me on the street, in the park, or in a parking lot. With this knowledge I build my personal self protection plan based on that manner of attack. This may not suit you, especially if you live in Hollywood.

[Dr.3D]

This is a big dick fight. They are trying to prove who has a bigger dick by asserting their dominance over each other. To be fair, while the police officers were dicks, why the hell would you open-carry a gun in a public place?!

So the bad guys will know who to shoot first.

[V3n]

I do gotta respect the fact that the officers figured out that he had a tape recorder and allowed him to continue recording.

I think they were just too stupid to figure out how to turn it off.

[pcosmar]

This is a big dick fight. They are trying to prove who has a bigger dick by asserting their dominance over each other. To be fair, while the police officers were dicks, why the hell would you open-carry a gun in a public place?!

Why wouldn't you? Why should you have to conceal a right?
Why should a useful tool be made less accessible?

Why don't ALL Police officers conceal theirs?

Why should people be concerned with armed neighbors or offended with that reality?

Why shouldn't the general public be educated as to a common right?

It is my personal belief that Open Carry is just more honest. as well as more comfortable and utilitarian.

[RonPaulCult]

Since this guy released the tapes to youtube, the philly police are seeking revenge.

"The Police Department heard about the YouTube clips. A new investigation was launched, and last month the District Attorney's Office decided to charge Fiorino with reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct because, a spokeswoman said, he refused to cooperate with police."

http://articles.philly.com/2011-05-16/news/29548742_1_firearms-license-youtube-clips-gun-rights

[Verrater]

This is a big dick fight. They are trying to prove who has a bigger dick by asserting their dominance over each other. To be fair, while the police officers were dicks, why the hell would you open-carry a gun in a public place?!

To me that's like asking: "why do you type on the internet?"

[AFPVet]

So the bad guys will know who to shoot first.

Well, I have been a cop for a few years and know that criminals do not want to risk being shot unless they are tweeked. Most criminals (even when they are armed and outnumber the good guys) will avoid a shoot out simply because they will likely be shot as well. I don't care if you pack a .22 or a .50 AE, no one wants to be shot!

If criminals can visibly see a weapon, it acts as a deterrent. Now if the criminal's are tweeked, then you want as many people with weapons putting lead down range into the CNS.

[Dr.3D]

Well, I have been a cop for a few years and know that criminals do not want to risk being shot unless they are tweeked. Most criminals (even when they are armed and outnumber the good guys) will avoid a shoot out simply because they will likely be shot as well. I don't care if you pack a .22 or a .50 AE, no one wants to be shot!

If criminals can visibly see a weapon, it acts as a deterrent. Now if the criminal's are tweeked, then you want as many people with weapons putting lead down range into the CNS.
Well, I would rather they not know I am packing. The element of surprise would be on my side.

[pcosmar]

Well, I have been a cop for a few years and know that criminals do not want to risk being shot unless they are tweeked. Most criminals (even when they are armed and outnumber the good guys) will avoid a shoot out simply because they will likely be shot as well. I don't care if you pack a .22 or a .50 AE, no one wants to be shot!
.
I can corroborate that statement from the other side. As an ex-con, and having lived in an unpleasant place with those of criminal intent.

Open Carry is a visible deterrent.

[cdc482]

Whoa guys. I totally agree that you have every right to carry a gun, but let's be logical.
You also have the right to use heroine. But you don't. There are good reasons not to. There are also good reasons to not open carry:

1- Which society would you rather live in: A-- everyone has a gun B--no one has a gun C-- some people have guns and carry them around others don't
2- It makes you stand out and freaks other people out. Seriously, imagine walking around anywhere you go regularly: a shopping mall, school, the gym, whatever and you see a guy with a gun. It's not a pleasant thing to see in public, even if you are a sportsman or whatever.
3- It just makes you look like a dick. Be realistic for Pete's sake. Do you really expect that you are going to need to use a gun to defend yourself while shopping?!?!?!

I don't know how to make it more clear. It's just a dick move. There's no reason for it. Just like IMO there's no good reason for suicide. Although, yes you have the right to do it.

That's my worry with libertarianism: people like you--who take it to heart to the point where it becomes your personal philosophy. You believe so strongly that people should be able to carry a gun that you do it yourself, when it's just dick. I believe lying, the West Boro Baptist Church, and Scientology should all have the right to exist for those who want to participate, but I'm not stupid enough to blur the difference between right as in I have the right to do this and right as in correct.

[pcosmar]

Whoa guys.

Do you really expect that you are going to need to use a gun to defend yourself while shopping?!?!?!
.
So are you opposed to Concealed Carry as well?

I can not believe that you would equate the HONEST exercise of a right with doing Heroin.
:(

[cdc482]

So are you opposed to Concealed Carry as well?

I can not believe that you would equate the HONEST exercise of a right with doing Heroin.
:(

Again I am not opposed to either. I am just setting aside politics and talking as a person. Conceal carry and open carry are both things you have a right to do. Just like you have the right to not let the guy with one item cut in front of you in line at the grocery store even though you just bought groceries for a month. But just like the previous senario: it's dick.

Conceal carrying is not as dick obv.

I can not understand peoples' fascinations with guns for "self-defense" in this day and age.

[Dr.3D]

Whoa guys. I totally agree that you have every right to carry a gun, but let's be logical.
You also have the right to use heroine. But you don't. There are good reasons not to. There are also good reasons to not open carry:

1- Which society would you rather live in: A-- everyone has a gun B--no one has a gun C-- some people have guns and carry them around others don't

A. B can't exist and C is what we have now.


2- It makes you stand out and freaks other people out. Seriously, imagine walking around anywhere you go regularly: a shopping mall, school, the gym, whatever and you see a guy with a gun. It's not a pleasant thing to see in public, even if you are a sportsman or whatever.

Didn't bother people back in the day when they were used to seeing nearly everybody carrying a gun.


3- It just makes you look like a dick. Be realistic for Pete's sake. Do you really expect that you are going to need to use a gun to defend yourself while shopping?!?!?!

Have there ever been shopping mall massacres? If everybody had a gun, the person doing the killing wouldn't last very long.


I don't know how to make it more clear. It's just a dick move. There's no reason for it. Just like IMO there's no good reason for suicide. Although, yes you have the right to do it.

That's my worry with libertarianism: people like you--who take it to heart to the point where it becomes your personal philosophy. You believe so strongly that people should be able to carry a gun that you do it yourself, when it's just dick. I believe lying, the West Boro Baptist Church, and Scientology should all have the right to exist for those who want to participate, but I'm not stupid enough to blur the difference between right as in I have the right to do this and right as in correct.

[cdc482]

I didn't say which can exist. I said which do you prefer. I am aware that--of what is possible--C is the best solution.
Times have changed. Carrying a gun does freak people out nowadays.
And as for shopping mall massacres--would it be too much trouble to conceal it, if you really believe you are fit to play Batman?
You have to realize that most people see those with a gun as creepy, not as an ethical hero out to save them from the truly crazy people.

You can't win this argument. The truth is both parties were dicks. Even though he had a right to carry a gun.

[pcosmar]

Again I am not opposed to either. I am just setting aside politics and talking as a person. Conceal carry and open carry are both things you have a right to do. Just like you have the right to not let the guy with one item cut in front of you in line at the grocery store even though you just bought groceries for a month. But just like the previous senario: it's dick.

Conceal carrying is not as dick obv.

No it is not. It is not being a Dick to hang a "Leatherman" on my belt. It is convenience. It is handy.
It is a tool. A gun is absolutely NO DIFFERENT.
Why should I have to carry a gun in an inconvenient manner or wear unneeded clothing to cover it?

My preferred Carry(when I owned one) is on my leg. there is no way to cover that.
Why is it being a dick?
I see police carry guns all the time. They are usually dicks, but not because of the gun. It is more their manners.

[pcosmar]

No it is not. It is not being a Dick to hang a "Leatherman" on my belt. It is convenience. It is handy.
It is a tool. A gun is absolutely NO DIFFERENT.
Why should I have to carry a gun in an inconvenient manner or wear unneeded clothing to cover it?

My preferred Carry(when I owned one) is on my leg. there is no way to cover that.
Why is it being a dick?
I see police carry guns all the time. They are usually dicks, but not because of the gun. It is more their manners.

Or lack thereof.

[cdc482]

Lol. I agree pcosmar. You have a right to carry one. And if you live like avatar, then I don't want to inconvenience your method of carrying your tools. POLITICALLY

PERSONALLY: you must realize that to go into a public place carrying a gun WILL cause a panic. It's like wearing a Jason mask into a movie theater. I don't know how to explain myself better.

In today's day and age, in that location and setting, the guy is a MAJOR DICK. How you fail to see that scares me.

There's a time and a place. You must realize that a public place is not the place to carry your gun openly without freaking most people out. Again this is a PERSONAL POV not a political one.

[pcosmar]

Times have changed. Carrying a gun does freak people out nowadays.

And that social conditioning is what many Open Carry activists are trying to correct.
People have been conditioned to be freaked out. 30 years ago people were NOT freaked out by it.
There were gun racks in truck as a rule. Guns were common and accepted as common.

Anti-gun propaganda has conditioned people to believe otherwise.
A visible firearm should be as common as a hat. But it will not be till the conditioning is reversed.

[cdc482]

This goes back to option A, B, or C. Guns being common is a good thing when you live under Hitler. In today's day and age, there is virtually no need for a gun. for self-defense. There will virtually never be a scenario when you need it to defend yourself.

However, if you really want to play safe, go ahead. But you have to realize that for a logical human being, you will be viewed as a dick for carrying your gun around VISIBLY in a public place where people don't see the need for one.

[AGRP]

Lol. I agree pcosmar. You have a right to carry one. And if you live like avatar, then I don't want to inconvenience your method of carrying your tools. POLITICALLY

PERSONALLY: you must realize that to go into a public place carrying a gun WILL cause a panic. It's like wearing a Jason mask into a movie theater. I don't know how to explain myself better.



Rosa Parks really should have stayed where she belonged /s

[aGameOfThrones]

Whoa guys. I totally agree that you have every right to carry a gun, but let's be logical.
You also have the right to use heroine. But you don't. There are good reasons not to. There are also good reasons to not open carry:

1- Which society would you rather live in: A-- everyone has a gun B--no one has a gun C-- some people have guns and carry them around others don't
2- It makes you stand out and freaks other people out. Seriously, imagine walking around anywhere you go regularly: a shopping mall, school, the gym, whatever and you see a guy with a gun. It's not a pleasant thing to see in public, even if you are a sportsman or whatever.
3- It just makes you look like a dick. Be realistic for Pete's sake. Do you really expect that you are going to need to use a gun to defend yourself while shopping?!?!?!

I don't know how to make it more clear. It's just a dick move. There's no reason for it. Just like IMO there's no good reason for suicide. Although, yes you have the right to do it.

That's my worry with libertarianism: people like you--who take it to heart to the point where it becomes your personal philosophy. You believe so strongly that people should be able to carry a gun that you do it yourself, when it's just dick. I believe lying, the West Boro Baptist Church, and Scientology should all have the right to exist for those who want to participate, but I'm not stupid enough to blur the difference between right as in I have the right to do this and right as in correct.

. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`

Your post just makes you be a dick LOL.

[pcosmar]

Lol. I agree pcosmar. You have a right to carry one.

NO I Don't.
This is what got me involved. You might say it is my "pet" issue. Though as I educated myself I found that it is not just the 2nd Amendment, but all of our rights that are in jeopardy.
But it was the issue that got me started and one that is very personal to me.

[Chester Copperpot]

Maybe it would be more beneficial for OC supporters to have a booth say in a public park? or a table or something with a lot of signs educating people???

[cdc482]

Rosa Parks really should have stayed where she belonged /s


WTF!!! Why do all the RPF people in the political threads just depress me!! I thought RP supporters were intelligent. That is the stupidest fucking statement I have ever heard in my whole fucking life! Rosa Parks was standing up against an unjust law. If I understand the video, he has the right to open carry. But it will still cause a panic.

You are forgetting the GIVEN: the time and place

[cdc482]

I want to do a poll on this issue to see how RPF is overall on this issue, because some of the responses on here are generally scary. How do I make a poll?

[pcosmar]

But it will still cause a panic.

You are forgetting the GIVEN: the time and place

What about police? They do make me nervous but not panic.
Do people panic when the see a gun on a uniformed hip?

Why not? Why should they panic when a non uniformed person is wearing one?

They should not. But they have been conditioned to. That needs to be changed.

[aGameOfThrones]

This goes back to option A, B, or C. Guns being common is a good thing when you live under Hitler. In today's day and age, there is virtually no need for a gun. for self-defense. There will virtually never be a scenario when you need it to defend yourself.

However, if you really want to play safe, go ahead. But you have to realize that for a logical human being, you will be viewed as a dick for carrying your gun around VISIBLY in a public place where people don't see the need for one.

. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`

[aGameOfThrones]

WTF!!! Why do all the RPF people in the political threads just depress me!! I thought RP supporters were intelligent. That is the stupidest fucking statement I have ever heard in my whole fucking life! Rosa Parks was standing up against an unjust law. If I understand the video, he has the right to open carry. But it will still cause a panic.

You are forgetting the GIVEN: the time and place

I hope you don't consider yourself intelligent... Have you read your drivel?

[cdc482]

I got quite shocked the first time I realized that was a gun on a policeman's belt. Maybe we should panic about it. If you are black, definitely. Something should change about that. But at least concede the point that the guy in this senario was being a dick.

Ideally, the world would be as in my childhood community, police were nice people. They knew most people in the town. They were always courteous, and even when dealing with dicks, force was a last resort.

Two wrongs though, don't make a right. Lead by example. Being a dick back to a dick isn't gonna make him less of a dick.

[aGameOfThrones]

I want to do a poll on this issue to see how RPF is overall on this issue, because some of the responses on here are generally scary. How do I make a poll?

Indeed, your comments are scary...

[pcosmar]

I got quite shocked the first time I realized that was a gun on a policeman's belt. Maybe we should panic about it. If you are black, definitely. Something should change about that. But at least concede the point that the guy in this senario was being a dick.



The Cop in the video was being a dick. That is the only apparent dick.
No one else. Most here see that.

[LibForestPaul]

I got quite shocked the first time I realized that was a gun on a policeman's belt. Maybe we should panic about it. If you are black, definitely. Something should change about that. But at least concede the point that the guy in this senario was being a dick.

Ideally, the world would be as in my childhood community, police were nice people. They knew most people in the town. They were always courteous, and even when dealing with dicks, force was a last resort.

Two wrongs though, don't make a right. Lead by example. Being a dick back to a dick isn't gonna make him less of a dick.

Sheople don't like the sheep with teeth. Makes em feel inadequate.

[aGameOfThrones]

I got quite shocked the first time I realized that was a gun on a policeman's belt. Maybe we should panic about it. If you are black, definitely. Something should change about that. But at least concede the point that the guy in this senario was being a dick.

Ideally, the world would be as in my childhood community, police were nice people. They knew most people in the town. They were always courteous, and even when dealing with dicks, force was a last resort.

Two wrongs though, don't make a right. Lead by example. Being a dick back to a dick isn't gonna make him less of a dick.


Two wrongs? The ocer was calm and willing to cooperate, was the cop the same?

[kylejack]

Regarding wiretap law, Pennsylvania is an all-party consent state. He could get in some trouble for the recording.

Edit: This may have expired in December 2008.

[Dr.3D]

Regarding wiretap law, Pennsylvania is an all-party consent state. He could get in some trouble for the recording.
No worry, there was no wire to tap.

[cdc482]

I'm not saying the cop wasn't a dick. He was a HUGE dick. But the guy he arrested was also a dick. Not during the video maybe, but he was a dick when he decided to bring a VISIBLE gun to a public place UNLESS he failed to foresee the likely reaction it would cause.

[cdc482]

Also, I've gotten pretty used to insults in debate. They don't demoralize me at all nowadays. However, if you want to hurt me you could try posting a logical sentence as to why you think I am wrong. That would hurt my ego quite a bit. Especially after I really put myself out there calling you stupid.

[aGameOfThrones]

I'm not saying the cop wasn't a dick. He was a HUGE dick. But the guy he arrested was also a dick. Not during the video maybe, but he was a dick when he decided to bring a VISIBLE gun to a public place UNLESS he failed to foresee the likely reaction it would cause.

. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`

[kylejack]

No worry, there was no wire to tap.
Unfortunately wiretap law is now being used in court with mixed success for in-person recordings.

[aGameOfThrones]

Also, I've gotten pretty used to insults in debate. They don't demoralize me at all nowadays. However, if you want to hurt me you could try posting a logical sentence as to why you think I am wrong. That would hurt my ego quite a bit. Especially after I really put myself out there calling you stupid.

When you make a logical one first. What you say you were again?

[aGameOfThrones]

If you open carry... You're being a dick.

If you exercise your 4th amendment protections at a checkpoint... You're being a dick.

If you exercise your 5th amendment protections... You're being a dick.

Etc,etc,etc.

[LibForestPaul]

If you open carry... You're being a dick.

If you exercise your 4th amendment protections at a checkpoint... You're being a dick.

If you exercise your 5th amendment protections... You're being a dick.

Etc,etc,etc.

Of course, stop making a commotion and making me late, I need to pass this TSA strip search and get to my plane! Baaaah

[aGameOfThrones]

Of course, stop making a commotion and making me late, I need to pass this TSA strip search and get to my plane! Baaaah

Scenario 1: Oh, he was recording...he was looking for trouble.

Scenario 2: there's no recording stating his side... I believe the cop first.

[aGameOfThrones]

You know, the statute needs to be amended to say, every person who applies for a lincese to OC must also obtain a citizen's badge stating ocer. Since the mundanes won't read it, when they see an ocer - they'll think it's a cop and won't go fetal position crazy.

And then, a black market for citizen badges will explode on account of the state making it too difficult to do it legally LOL.

[kylejack]

Here's the code. Note the oral part especially.

18 Pa.C.S.A. § 5703

Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, a person is guilty of a felony of the third degree if he:

(1) intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept any wire, electronic or oral communication;
(2) intentionally discloses or endeavors to disclose to any other person the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication; or
(3) intentionally uses or endeavors to use the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing or having reason to know, that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication.
http://weblinks.westlaw.com/result/default.aspx?cite=UUID%28NDCAE3CF034-2D11DA8A989-F4EECDB8638%29&db=1000262&findtype=VQ&fn=_top&pbc=DA010192&rlt=CLID_FQRLT9492340721175&rp=%2FSearch%2Fdefault.wl&rs=WEBL11.04&service=Find&spa=pac-1000&sr=TC&vr=2.0

They extended it to 2013, so it looks like he would theoretically be in violation.

[aGameOfThrones]

Here's the code. Note the oral part especially.

18 Pa.C.S.A. § 5703

Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, a person is guilty of a felony of the third degree if he:

(1) intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept any wire, electronic or oral communication;
(2) intentionally discloses or endeavors to disclose to any other person the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication; or
(3) intentionally uses or endeavors to use the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing or having reason to know, that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication.
http://weblinks.westlaw.com/result/default.aspx?cite=UUID%28NDCAE3CF034-2D11DA8A989-F4EECDB8638%29&db=1000262&findtype=VQ&fn=_top&pbc=DA010192&rlt=CLID_FQRLT9492340721175&rp=%2FSearch%2Fdefault.wl&rs=WEBL11.04&service=Find&spa=pac-1000&sr=TC&vr=2.0

They extended it to 2013, so it looks like he would theoretically be in violation.

Hmm...

[pcosmar]

You know, the statute needs to be amended to say, every person who applies for a lincese to OC must also obtain a citizen's badge stating ocer. Since the mundanes won't read it, when they see an ocer - they'll think it's a cop and won't go fetal position crazy.

And then, a black market for citizen badges will explode on account of the state making it too difficult to do it legally LOL.

Already available.

http://www.bolditalic.com/quotulatiousness_archive/Stinkin_Badge.jpg

[kylejack]

Oh, I don't think that part is any problem for the authorities. Typically these laws are interpreted as the recorder is required to inform the recorded that they are being recorded, or stop recording. There's no question these laws are unjust, but I just hope he doesn't get in trouble for this. Looks like they're trying to prosecute him for disturbing the peace and reckless endangerment.

[krhedwards]

...In today's day and age, there is virtually no need for a gun. for self-defense. There will virtually never be a scenario when you need it to defend yourself...

Sorry. I was shot at and run down by two men a few years ago in a nice neighborhood in Vegas. Still to this day I don't know how I got away. And while I don't carry my gun everywhere I go nowadays I know I should. Since then I have purchased a few and have learned how to shoot for defense.

[Lucille]

The time will come, and soon, that everyone will need to carry a gun for protection, no matter where they live in the US.

[demolama]

Germany was one of the most enlightened countries in the world. No one thought that in the age of science and technology that an enlightened country would turn on a segment of its populace. If it could happen in Germany it can happen anywhere. That is why for the life of me can not understand why so many Jews are so anti-gun... a lesson obviously not learned.

[Anti Federalist]

This goes back to option A, B, or C. Guns being common is a good thing when you live under Hitler. In today's day and age, there is virtually no need for a gun. for self-defense. There will virtually never be a scenario when you need it to defend yourself.

However, if you really want to play safe, go ahead. But you have to realize that for a logical human being, you will be viewed as a dick for carrying your gun around VISIBLY in a public place where people don't see the need for one.

Yeah, I got nothing...

. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`