Gems of Wisdom from "The Gun Guys"

[gorfle]

So I watched the video, and now I'm skimming the rest of the site. First page I go to is full of crap. Here we go:

http://www.gunguys.com/?m=200804

So let’s get this straight, you need a concealed handgun to intimidate others from attacking you, but you don’t want anyone, especially law enforcement officials, to know that you are a CCW permit holder? Now that’s a head scratcher, to be sure.

First of all, you don't carry a concealed handgun to intimidate. That's the whole point of having it concealed!

Second of all, since you have to go to your local law enforcement office to get your CCW permit, it's certainly no secret to them that you have one!

The truth is that if a CCW permit holder is pulled over for a traffic violation for example, it would be helpful for a police officer to know that the person might be armed with a concealed handgun. What is more important: the safety of our law enforcement officers, or the gun lobby's paranoia over databases? We should also state that just because the media, law enforcement officials and other persons of interest have access to the information about CCW permit holders in no way prohibits applicants from obtaining a CCW permit.

While I think it's just good common sense to tell any law enforcement officer that I have firearms on my person or in my vehicle, I don't see how it has anything to do with the safety of our law enforcement officers. If anything, an police officer would probably be relieved to discovered they had pulled over a CCW permit holder, since it has been demonstrated that CCW permit holders are among the most law-abiding citizens in the nation.

In an era of open government, accountability and transparency why does the gun lobby feel they deserve a special privilege over public safety? Instead the gun lobby demands total secrecy.

It's not total secrecy. It is simply none of the general publics' business that a) own firearms and b) that I choose to carry them concealed. Your tax records, social security information, and driver's license data isn't public information, why should my CCW permit data be?

What's not a secret is that carrying deadly, hidden and loaded handguns in public places such as child daycare centers, hospitals, nursing homes, schools, college campuses, shopping malls, churches and even bars is a really bad idea and puts communities are risk.

Since CCW permit holders have been demonstrated to be among the most law-abiding citizens in the nation, I'd say your at less risk having a CCW permit holder in these places than your average citizen.

[Tejas]

1. If pulled over in Texas

you must present your CHL with your DL.

And with all due respect to LEO's, CHL holders tend to get a LOT more range time and therefore are very familiar with safety procedures etc concerning their weapons.

[east texas lib]

11. If pulled over in vehicle registered to a CHL holder, the CHL will show up with your car tags.

(In the DPS system.)

[OffWithTheirHeads]

2. Oh Christ! Go rant someware else.

nt

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

3. I'm pretty sure this belongs in the gun forum.

If you have another suggestion we'll be happy to hear it.

David

[gorfle]

4. Heh...

Oh Christ! Go rant someware else.

No need to be formal, you may call me "gorfle" if you like.

[SteveM]

6. Please note we are in "Topic Forums: Guns." nt

[pipoman]

10. Is someware anything like Tupperware?? N/T

[spin]

5. The police officer who rooms with us...

mentioned that he had never had a problem with any CCW holder he had pulled over for a traffic stop or encountered while on duty. He's a firm believer in the right of honest licensed citizens to own and carry weapons. He holds a much different view of criminals with weapons. Most Florida cops hold the same view.

Recently a neighbor reported a prowler. I was at her house when the on duty officer arrived. Her grandchild felt the prowler might be next door hiding in the rather large yard of an unoccupied house. As he went to check the yard out, he asked me if I was carrying. Of course, I was. He then asked me if I would like to come along and assist. I did. If the prowler had been in the yard he had fled by the time we got there.

As you pointed out, people who have concealed permits don't carry a weapon to intimidate people. A well concealed weapon never intimidates anyone. I've never known a person with a concealed carry permit who enjoyed the art of intimidation. All were polite calm individuals who would go out of their way to avoid confrontation.

The reason CCW holders don't want the fact that they have a license made public knowledge is fairly simple. Guns are valuable. If criminals knows you have valuable items in your house, you may become a target. Wise criminals wait until you're not home. Even if your guns are stored in a safe, a professional can make entry and secure them. An amateur criminal may not be able to open the safe, but he can steal other valuable items and ransack your dwelling. Honest gun owners are concerned about their weapons being stolen and falling into criminal hands. Anti-gunners should understand that public access to a database of CCW holders might easily result in an increase of weapons in the hands of irresponsible people.

What's not a secret is that carrying deadly, hidden and loaded handguns in public places such as child daycare centers, hospitals, nursing homes, schools, college campuses, shopping malls, churches and even bars is a really bad idea and puts communities are risk.

Gun free zones are a bad idea. Used properly and responsibly, guns can be used by honest citizens to deter crime. I see no problem with properly licensed people carrying in child daycare centers, hospitals, nursing homes, schools, college campuses and shopping malls.

Firearms in bars is a bad idea. Guns and alcohol don't mix.

[old mark]

7. In PA, cops have computers...

...in their cars, and your name/DL will reveal that you have a license to carry a firearm, so you might as well tell the cop up front.
Besides, last I read, the large numbers of carry license holders in PA-there are over 25 thousand in my county (Berks County, PA) alone-are responsible for less than .1% of violent crimes.
It is the ones who don't obey the laws in the first place who we all have to worry about.

mark

[OffWithTheirHeads]

9. Isn't that always the case?

Law abiding citizens will generally obey the law. Outlaws don't care what the law says. They will do what they want. You don't prevent crime by restricting those who respect the law because those who don't respect the law are not going to play by your rules anyway. On the other hand, if the criminals are not sure who is armed, they need to think twice before making you a victim.

[aikoaiko]

8. The gun guys make the NRA look honest.

[maxidivine]

12. In all fairness to the NRA

They are and have been for about 130 years the premier organization in promoting firearms safety, and have done more for developing safety and beginners curriculum than any other organization. And they aren't really a political group, the political affiliate of the NRA is the NRA-ILA, only the NRA-ILA is allowed to act in the political arena. What they both do, however, is focus on a single important piece of American freedom, one that has the most vehement opposition as well, and help their members follow important events as well as pick out candidates who are most likely to be true to their oaths of office, most notably the oath to defend the constitution of the United States from ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. As much as some hate it and believe it is outdated or inapplicable, the 2nd Amendment is indeed a protected part of our most important legal and historical document.

The NRA seems to be really hated here and elsewhere, but the truth is they are a safety and familiarization organization first and foremost, and they have recommended Democratic candidates over Republicans and Independents in the past, because they are not trying to press right-wing ideals, so the party of a politician isn't a relevant issue.

Flame on.

[aikoaiko]

13. I can't disagree with you about the benefits of the NRA or the political arm

But from time to time they engage in a different sort of fear mongering. My point is that whatever excesses the NRA has engaged in, they pale in comparison to the massive distortions put forth by the (anti-)gunguys.com.

[maxidivine]

14. NRA Fearmongering

I haven't read enough NRA publications to be really familiar with their tactics, but I am fairly familiar with anti-gunner's tactics, and yes, they are despicable.

Pretty sure I've seen someone write that they believe gun owners should be executed.

That's far out.

[iverglas]

15. how sure?

Pretty sure I've seen someone write that they believe gun owners should be executed.

15%? 82.3%?

I'm absolutely sure I've seen someone write that they believe the earth is flat. In fact, if you think of some far out / horrible thing that someone could believe and google it, I'll bet you'll be able to say you've seen that too.

I'm pretty sure that only a truly vile person would write what you've written. Not 100% sure, of course. So I wouldn't claim it to be true. I'd be like you, and use insinuation and innuendo to smear as many people as possible.


http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.guns/browse_thread/thread/f0f107e603da9e93

Kill the persecutors of David Olofson

Kill the Gun Grabbers

Mar 19, 3:12 pm
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns, misc.survivalism, alt.society.liberalism, alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.bush

From: Kill the Gun Grabbers
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:12:50 +0100
Local: Wed, Mar 19 2008 3:12 pm

Subject: Kill the persecutors of David Olofson

A man named David Olofson from Berlin, Wisconsin loaned a semi-automatic AR-15 rifle out to a friend. The rifle malfunctioned, which caused it to fire more than one round with one pull of the trigger.

Under the illegitimate edicts of the international terrorist organization known as the "United States Government", any firearm that fires more than one round per trigger pull is a "machinegun", and is "banned" from civilian transfer or possession. David Olofson had his house searched, was arrested, put on "trial" for these violations of the "law", and found "guilty" of "transferring a machinegun":

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2008/03/13/ld... ....
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/03/14/tu... ...

The militia of free and sovereign individuals cannot allow this crime to go unpunished:

* Those involved in the raid on David Olofson's home, including the local police and the BATFE agents, need to be killed. The lead BATFE agent in charge, Jody M. Keeku, needs to be raped and killed. As a sentence enhancement, two immediate family members of each Enforcement Agent involved with the case need to be put to death.

* The federal prosecutors, including one "Assistant U.S. Attorney" Gregory Haanstad, who led this persecution all need to be tortured and killed, along with their entire families, including children.

* The federal judge overseeing the case in the Eastern District of Wisconsin needs to be tortured and killed.

* Members of the jury who voted to convict David Olofson need to be tortured and put to death.

* Furthermore, anyone who attempts to enforce the illegitimate edict known as "Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(o)" needs to be tortured and killed.

Kill all the gun grabbers.

Just think, if you bookmark this, you'll be able to back up what you think when you say you're pretty sure you've seen someone write that they believe gun grabbers should be raped and tortured and killed along with their entire families. I'm sure that's a tale you'll be eager to recount.



typo fixed

[maxidivine]

16. Don't you love to jump on the rape bandwagon?

didn't you have a few posts where you lit into someone because they used the word rape? Didn't you tell them that there is no such thing as rape, only sexual assault level 5?

Anyway have a lovely afternoon.

[iverglas]

17. if only ...

If only I hadn't been quoting some asshole. If the asshole had only referred to killing people, which is all I needed and all I really wanted, I would have been quite satisfied. It was the asshole's choice to do the rest. Maybe you should go say something to him/her, eh?


didn't you have a few posts where you lit into someone because they used the word rape?

Nope.

Didn't you tell them that there is no such thing as rape, only sexual assault level 5?

Nope.


Anything else?

[maxidivine]

19. Liar Liar Pant on fire!

Here's one now-

"iverglas (1000+ posts) Mon Apr-28-08 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. RAPE! RAPE! RAPE!

One of our little chats just wouldn't be complete w/o somebody slavering over it ..."

And another
"iverglas (1000+ posts) Wed Apr-02-08 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #42
44. ooooh, it's the gun-lover's fantasy


A woman beaten, strangled and raped, AND a bad guy with a bullet hole in him.

What more could anyone want?

Especially in a thread that had NOTHING to do with women being beaten, stranged and raped.

In fact, it didn't have anything to do with women. "

And another
" iverglas (1000+ posts) Tue Aug-15-06 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. let's try this one

Now, it gets more complicated after this -- because of the apples:oranges problem. For instance, Canada does not have an offence called "rape"; we have an offence called "sexual assault", with varying degrees that depend on the level of force/threat/weapon used, not on the sex of the victim or offender, or the nature of the sexual element of the assault."


Should I keep looking?

[iverglas]

23. I seem to have been called a liar when I wasn't looking

And the individual who called me a liar seems to be kicking up a stink because by the time s/he did it, my post had dropped off the edge of the 48-hour cliff and I did not see the reply in my "my posts" list. I need shooting.


Your initial allegations:

didn't you have a few posts where you lit into someone because they used the word rape?

Didn't you tell them that there is no such thing as rape, only sexual assault level 5?


You have now copied and pasted a previous post of mine.

What you'll be wanting to do is identify what portions of that post support both of those allegations.

Not hard -- copy a portion of that post and juxtapose it with one of those allegations. Then offer your analysis to support your allegation that they amount to the same thing.

Not hard ... if the allegations were true.


missing word inserted

[maxidivine]

21. Crickets

Are all I'm hearing.

Iverglas, come out and play


iverglas, come out and plaaaay

[maxidivine]

22. Where are your snide comments hiding now?

[donutwant]

18. Here's the full story behind the "Gun Guys" (lol)

for anybody thats interested.

http://armedandsafe.blogspot.com/2007/02/follow-money-look-at-gun-guys-sugar.html

[spin]

20. The "Gun Guys should call themselves the "Anti-Gun Guys" (n/t)