aquila

Good Morning:

I was reading recently how some right-wing militia groups were going to places like Starbucks armed to the teeth in order to show they are going to use their gun rights no matter what.

OK. So I was wondering that since this is perfectly legal and most everyone forms no objection to that if it would also be ok if a socialist group would go to Starbucks armed to the teeth or would they be arrested for something.

You might justify arresting a communist group as they advocate the forcible removable of our government. But a socialist group advocates change through the ballot box.

So what do you all think? I was hoping for some original thought here instead of just the sound bites that most writers here are capable of.

Thanks

Jim

Snoopy

Aquila

As long as everything is done according to existing law NO ONE should have any problem.

America has been a FREE and law abiding country - let's try to keep it that way!

Snoopy

Trooper745 Loc: Carolina

Interesting question, since I have always assumed that the Second Amendment applied to everyone, regardless of their political views. I think your first problem is that you assume everyone carrying a weapon to be a right-wing extremist, and that is certainly an error.

I can see why you would question the reaction of the public to those on the left appearing in public, "armed to the teeth" as you put it. Most leftists are very radical, whether they are promoting homosexuality, save the trees, no oil drilling, or climate change is killing all the polar bears.

I guess that the average leftists would have to enter Starbucks, wildly firing their weapons in random directions, while screaming, "We're here, and we're queer.", or tearfully exclaiming, "Thousands of Polar Bears are dying every day!", to feel that they were exercising their second amendment rights to the same point that the conservatives were by simply having a gun on their belts while calmly quaffing their lattes.

aquila

That is really interesting. Thank you for the thoughtful post.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here's what I think. Every sane adult American HAS THE FREEDOM TO BE ARMED unless he is a criminal, regardless what our government says, and until he uses a gun illegally or until he threatens with a gun, he is merely an American: no foul, no penalty. When he threatens with a gun or a knife or with a fist, or with an iron skillet, he should be taken to jail until it is determined why he was threatening someone.

Complaining is not a threat. Sometimes people see disagreement as a threat. It isn't. I've seen it here on OPP so I KNOW some seem to see things that are not there, such as disagreements being "threats". When disagreements become threats, we have totally lost all liberty, never to be regained. Politicians are afraid of their shadows because they KNOW the sorry things they have done and they KNOW many thousands of people disagree with them. Do not let the government, the dumbest of all Americans, make you afraid of disagreements.

Blue Flu Loc: HHI

[quote=aquila]Good Morning:

I was reading recently how some right-wing militia groups were going to places like Starbucks armed to the teeth in order to show they are going to use their gun rights no matter what.

OK. So I was wondering that since this is perfectly legal and most everyone forms no objection to that if it would also be ok if a socialist group would go to Starbucks armed to the teeth or would they be arrested for something.

You might justify arresting a communist group as they advocate the forcible removable of our government. But a socialist group advocates change through the ballot box.

So what do you all think? I was hoping for some original thought here instead of just the sound bites that most writers here are capable of.

Thanks

Jim[/quote

Looks like the sign stating "No Shoes No Service" needs to be updated at restaurants and the like.
IMO, if a person has a license to carry concealed all well and good. This person has been supposedly cleared by the State to do so....at least in THAT State. In Georgia, for instance, even with such a license, it used to be unlawful to carry a firearm "at a public gathering" conveniently omitting the definition of a "public gathering."
If I were that manager of the Starbucks for instance, I would simply ask those openly carrying firearms to leave. A clear case of my right as manager to supersede those of the firearm totter(s) within the confines of the establishment.
Common sense would dictate that a municipal ordinance/State Law would ban people from walking down a crowded city street openly "armed to the teeth". If such a law/ordinance doesn't exist it soon will be enacted. The public alarm alone would be enough to make an arrest for disorderly conduct.
These are scary times.

Trooper745 Loc: Carolina

I find it amusing that the left thinks a business owner should have the right to refuse service to, and eject, a person exercising his second amendment rights, but another business owner can be legally forced to bake a homosexual wedding cake.

Typical leftist thinking, ... in one case, the business owner's rights supersede the gun owner's constitutional rights, but in the other case, the homosexual customer's rights supersede the business owner's constitutional rights. Interesting how liberals think.

Comment Loc: California

[quote=Blue Flu][quote=aquila]Good Morning:

I was reading recently how some right-wing militia groups were going to places like Starbucks armed to the teeth in order to show they are going to use their gun rights no matter what.

OK. So I was wondering that since this is perfectly legal and most everyone forms no objection to that if it would also be ok if a socialist group would go to Starbucks armed to the teeth or would they be arrested for something.

You might justify arresting a communist group as they advocate the forcible removable of our government. But a socialist group advocates change through the ballot box.

So what do you all think? I was hoping for some original thought here instead of just the sound bites that most writers here are capable of.

Thanks

Jim[/quote

Looks like the sign stating "No Shoes No Service" needs to be updated at restaurants and the like.
IMO, if a person has a license to carry concealed all well and good. This person has been supposedly cleared by the State to do so....at least in THAT State. In Georgia, for instance, even with such a license, it used to be unlawful to carry a firearm "at a public gathering" conveniently omitting the definition of a "public gathering."
If I were that manager of the Starbucks for instance, I would simply ask those openly carrying firearms to leave. A clear case of my right as manager to supersede those of the firearm totter(s) within the confines of the establishment.
Common sense would dictate that a municipal ordinance/State Law would ban people from walking down a crowded city street openly "armed to the teeth". If such a law/ordinance doesn't exist it soon will be enacted. The public alarm alone would be enough to make an arrest for disorderly conduct.
These are scary times.[/quote]

Oregan has FAGGOT laws that force a bakery owner to serve, or work for FAGGOTS whether they like it or not. So what does Starbucks do when a FAGGOT walks up with a gun--a legal carry. I use FAGGOT just to piss of you leftist because you use the derogatory term, "Armed To The Teeth." Sorry Queers.

cold iron Loc: White House

The only problem is the left have all the ballot boxes fixed so only the left can win...

dan miller Loc: U.S.A./Michigan

The leftist militias =the S.A. of the Nazis party of the'20's&'30's the came the S.S.&GESTPO. Rember that from history

Blue Flu Loc: HHI

A case of Democrat politicians cultivating their image as those who stickup for the rights of the downtrodden and persecuted minorities in exchange for their votes.
If Democrat politicians really cared for OUR poor by enacting, for example, the "War on Poverty", why would they want to inflate the number of poor here by adding about 20,000,000 mostly poor immigrants from Central America? Could it be for their vote in future elections?
Can't our own tax money grabbers figure out that their share of the welfare pie is about to get a lot smaller if their political champions in Washington have their way?

Kevyn

"There is no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying a loaded weapon" this is a quote by Ronald Regan when he signed the Mumford act in 1967 taking away the right of peaceful citizens to carry rifles and shotguns in public. He signed the act because he saw openly carrying shotguns and rifles in public especialy in our citys as an insult to common sense and that most of the public would view it as a potential threat to peace and order.

cold iron Loc: White House

That was when Regan had the nut jobs locked up. But today the nut jobs are running the country.

semper-fi Loc: Corrupticut

liberals Don't think that's their problem

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

Both sides think that of the other. :wink:

"It is not best we all think alike...it is a difference of opinion
that makes horse races." [quote/] Mark Twain.

Semper Fi, Marine! :thumbup: