Idiot of the year goes to these guys (and it's only February)

[Sam1]

11 minutes ago, ken56 said:

Wow, sure you aren't a member of mommies demand action too? And BTW< its legal to openly carry a firearm into a school (with a permit) in MI too. I don't hide the fact I carry a firearm around town here and am amazed how quick to attack people who do on here. I exercise my 2A right as I see fit. Baiting? and admit to what exactly?  I don't go all tactical when I carry, I look good and act politely. Did what they did defy "common sense". To most people it did I can agree. You have to know these guys history to understand what and why they do what they do. Again, If we willingly give up rights while engaged in legal activity we have no hope of ever retaining any of our rights.

Do you think there were constraints put on the first amendment before people started using it as a legal excuse when they were charged with making threats of doing bodily harm to someone or inciting an incident?  Or do you think it happened after morons started trying to use it as an excuse to be morons?

[Dustbuster]

i can think of many things that get adrenaline flowing. getting blasted to smithereens in the cop shop for doing what they did;doesnt seem like it would generate a rush, just lots of gunshot noise and screams.... just sayin


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ken56]

4 minutes ago, Sam1 said:

Do you think there were constraints put on the first amendment before people started using it as a legal excuse when they were charged with making threats of doing bodily harm to someone or inciting an incident?  Or do you think it happened after morons started trying to use it as an excuse to be morons?

Apples to oranges there. Threats are not free speech. Actually inciting a riot or "incident" is not free speech.

[ken56]

OK, charges are resisting,  breach of peace and failure to comply. All BS charges. My money is charges will be dismissed. Anyone wanting to read more go to OPENCARRY.ORG. You can read without having to register or give any personal info. Go to forums and scroll down to the MI forum.

Edited February 9, 2017 by ken56

[Sam1]

19 minutes ago, ken56 said:

Apples to oranges there. Threats are not free speech. Actually inciting a riot or "incident" is not free speech.

No, it's oranges to oranges.  The only difference is, you weren't around when the restrictions were put on the first amendment because of people failing to exercise common sense.

Quote

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Could you explain to me where in that statement that is says "free speech is ok, just don't make any threats" because I can't seem to find it.

[mikegideon]

1 hour ago, Sam1 said:

Challenge accepted, Voldemort has disappeared since the school thing. Prior to that, Id say you had a fair chance at being correct.

He never had the cojones to get himself shot

[ken56]

The Bill of Rights is a constraint on GOVERNMENT, not what individuals do or say.  The Constitution enumerates the duties and obligations of GOVERNMENT, not private individuals. The Constitution AFFIRMS the natural rights bestowed upon an individual by his creator that the GOVERNMENT is (supposedly) barred from infringing upon those rights. Threats between individuals is NOT 1st amendment protected free speech.

Edited February 9, 2017 by ken56

[mikegideon]

1 hour ago, ken56 said:

I maintain they did nothing illegal. Open carry of any firearm in MI is legal WITHOUT a permit. Masks are legal to wear anywhere. Looking like GI Joe is legal. They will charge them with some BS thing like disorderly conduct or inciting panic. I will try to keep up on exactly what the charges are.

It's not illegal to eat your own turds.

[Sam1]

5 minutes ago, ken56 said:

The Bill of Rights is a constraint on GOVERNMENT, not what individuals do or say.  The Constitution enumerates the duties and obligations of GOVERNMENT, not private individuals. The Constitution AFFIRMS the natural rights bestowed upon an individual by his creator that the GOVERNMENT is (supposedly) bared from infringing upon those rights. Threats between individuals is NOT 1st amendment protected free speech.

ok if you want to play technicality, calling in a false bomb threat is illegal even if it's in the middle of the desert on a mothballed building.  You're just trying to split hairs to avoid conflict because it identifies a contradiction on the basis of the argument for OC people (stereotyping here).

Edited February 9, 2017 by Sam1

[ken56]

No technicality at all. Please explain how you believe calling in a bomb threat anywhere is free speech.

[Sam1]

Just now, ken56 said:

No technicality at all. Please explain how you believe calling in a bomb threat anywhere is free speech.

Thanks for biting on that one as well.  See, the previous post for the exact verbiage " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press "

So, because there were idiots that existed over time that felt the need to see how far they could push the limits, i.e. 'exercising their rights because if we don't exercise them they will be taken from us' that required interpretation by the courts that ultimately resulted in constraints being placed on the rights we have as citizens concerning free speech.  See the link below for a time table and names of people that contributed to the restriction of the first amendment:

http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does

Now, this is an simile of what is currently happening with the 2a 'gotta OC or they will take our guns' crowd.  Do you think that by inciting incidents, that you are going to expand our constitutional rights beyond the level of "shall not be infringed"? No, because you can't.  All that will come of this, is that one of these idiots is going to have their name listed in a court case on the uscourts.gov website concerning the 2a under the "shall not be infringed does NOT include" section.

[Ray Z]

The [gentlemen?] in the film clip get my vote for the Darwin award for the month of February. Police go through months of training to be paranoid. If you're going to pull on Superman's cape a good stiff kick in the butt is the least of your worries.

[ken56]

Sam, you are so clever, you got me again....geeze, silly me.

[Danger Rane]

Ken, as I briefly read thru this thread it came across loud and clear that you have a lot of disdain for the LEO community, I don't know why, and don't really care, but that is the message you are putting out. What you need to realize is that while a few in this group might have similar feelings to you, the majority of the group is extremely supportive of law enforcement officers and their willingness to deal with (on our behalf) the societal scum, and idiots like the guys in the video. I respect LEO's just like I respect our military personnel. They get up everyday, kit up, and walk out the door to face whatever this jacked up world is going to throw at them, and they do it for relatively little pay, and with an increasing lack of support at all levels. Are there bad apples in the group, sure.....just like there is in everything (to include TGO). But to minimize or disrespect what the force does as a whole based on a few bad apples, or to treat the guys walking the streets with disrespect because you don't agree with the law of the land is crap. If you want the laws/policies changed you have to come at it from a smarter angle than terrorizing the sheep and antagonizing the sheepdogs.

[Wingshooter]

2 hours ago, ken56 said:

. Open carry of any firearm in MI is legal WITHOUT a permit.

 Few more stunts like this, and that may change.

[Wingshooter]

Ya know, the video probaby would have been more entertaining if there would have been a K9 unit present 

 

What's wrong with people? I guess it's not illegal to go to the zoo and jump in the lion's cage with a steak hanging around your neck either, but somewhere common sense should prevail. I have no sympathy or respect for attention seekers that try to simply push a bad situation with an open carry stunt. Those guys charged in there looking for trouble, and I think they're lucky it ended well.

[Sunfish]

Someone should have shown their Mother about birth control.

[DaveTN]

9 hours ago, ken56 said:

The police are more of a threat to the citizen than the citizen is to the police.  

And there we have it.....

[Sam1]

9 hours ago, ken56 said:

Sam, you are so clever, you got me again....geeze, silly me.

Yeah, love to pull OC radicals down the rabbit hole and beat them with a common sense stick.

If you have a legitimate challenge to the post, i'm definitely interested to hear it (and this is not a personal attack whatsoever, it is a challenge against the type of mentality that is shared by a couple of people that think they speak for everyone in the 2a community).

[BigK]

9 hours ago, Wingshooter said:

 Few more stunts like this, and that may change.

You hit the nail right on the head with that.

When folks like these idiots choose this method of exerting their 2A rights, I suspect they are just wanting to be the center of attention for selfish reasons.

If they really had pro-2A intentions in mind they'd not cast such a bad light on an the cause they claim to support. NOTHING good seems to come from the kind of attention they bring to gun rights efforts. If any legislative actions occur or any public opinions are created/changed as a result of their actions, they will not be positive.

[Sam1]

now now, don't be bringing any of that common sense stuff in here BigK, because if you mention common sense, that means you are a member of moms support gun control.

[ken56]

Good morning gentleman, in spite of accusations of my "disdain" for LEO I will just say that I have high respect for any LEO that conducts himself with professionalism and knows and understands the very laws we entrust him to uphold. I do not think they walk on water and deserve more leeway in the law than the citizen, being held to a LOWER standard than what the citizen is held to. Is that too much to ask of them?

Just like with the controversy  over the presidents travel ban, the issue with what these guys did is ...was it legal (and were they justly arrested).  The police act outside the law at times and I just want the good officers to be just in the application of the law, not to jam people up for lawful conduct and actions. I have great respect for those officers that do their job within the constraints placed upon them by our constitution, they themselves are not ABOVE the law.

The carry of firearms is enshrined in the MI State Constitution so it will take great effort to take that away from its citizens, unlike TN that has the wording of 'with an eye toward preventing crime' wiggle room in it. We are either free men or we are not and I feel the requirement of a license to carry in public in this state is unconstitutional. That's just my opinion.

As to common sense, I stated that I did not agree with their method. I do not advocate going full tactical and making a spectacle  of ones self if he is trying to advance the idea that good people carry firearms too, we must project a better image than that. The MI forums have pretty much the same response as this forum and not many support it. What they do support is that  LAWFUL acts should not be criminalized, no matter how lacking in common sense it is.

Heck, all I was doing here is playing devil's advocate and trying to make a good discussion out of what was just a pile on of "what idiots" these guys are. We went through this over people in TX before they enacted their open carry law. You all called those guys idiots too for carrying their AR's into a fast food restaurant. Well, its seems they accomplished their goal of getting open carry of handguns legalized. Good for them. Long gun open carry was their only avenue to do that. I say good job on them.

Think what you will of me gentleman but we are more alike than we are different.

[vontar]

Wow.  

[tacops]

9 hours ago, ken56 said:

Think what you will of me gentleman but we are more alike than we are different.

I don't think so Scooter.

[ken56]

Aww, you hurt my feels now. That's alright though, that door swings both ways.