California visitors

Discussion in 'Indiana Glockers' started by boilergonzo, Sep 27, 2007.

  1. boilergonzo

    boilergonzo

    Messages:
    3,495
    Likes Received:
    2,392
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    Indiana
    Interesting day... had a few folks in from California (SF area). Eating lunch, and a guy at a table near us dressed up has the tails of his suit spread and... a Glock is tucked in the small of his back, butt sticking way out of the suit. Cali #1 comments that the guy has a gun! Others are shocked and ask if that is legal. Sould we call the police? One stated he had never seen a gun anywhere other than one on a police officer or in a movie.

    I assured them that not only was it legal, it was common, and there was no need for alarm. A waiter noticed and was pointing to the guy and clearly telling co-workers the guy had a gun. Trying to be the nice guy, as I was walking past the gun-toting "lunatic", I quietly said "Just so you know, your gun is visible, and some patrons are expressing concern." and gave a quick smile. He smiled and said thanks, and covered the gun.

    I didn't care, but didn't want to see they guy hassled. My helpfullness was all for naught. Some folks came up and talked to him, and we overheard him and his dining companion laugh, and gently explain their job involved guns, being employess of the ATF! They produced credentials, and I felt a little silly for trying to help him. For all I know he prefers to carry for easy access and may have had the coat tail intentionally tucked behind his gun for a quick draw!

    Oh well! Good intentions!
     
  2. rhino465

    rhino465

    Messages:
    1,472
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2003
    Location:
    Indiana, USA
    All the more reason why we should carry openly whenever it is prudent to do. We need to re-educate the sheep, and it's not going to happen without some effort. In the situation you described, it probably made a difference to the people who questioned them that they were gov't agents rather than private citizens, as if they have some sacred right to carry guns when others do not. We need to nip that attitude in the bud.

    I hope you kept the Californians in quarantine when you were not supervising them directly!!
     

  3. wesley

    wesley

    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Location:
    CA
    I didn't know public indecency was legal in Indiana :shocked:



    :rofl:
     
  4. epsylum

    epsylum Boolit Hoze

    Messages:
    3,868
    Likes Received:
    4
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Location:
    Racing Capital, USA
    You should let the californiaites know that even though they may have been ATF, that concealed and open carry is perfectly legal if one has a license and you don't have to be a congressman to get on unlike in SF. Let them know that chances are they will run into many non-LEOs with legally owned and carried concealed weapons while they are here and probably already have.

    If guns killed people there would be a whole BUNCH of dead people at Knob Creek.
     
  5. boilergonzo

    boilergonzo

    Messages:
    3,495
    Likes Received:
    2,392
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    Indiana
    Trust me. We had a nice conversation! They were more than a little surprised to learn that I own firearms. Apparantly they thought I was a reasonable person, and reasonable people just don't need guns. So now they either have to reconcile the fact that some decent folks own guns, or that I was labeled in their minds incorrectly, and should promptly be moved from the "reasonable" folder to "fringe lunatic" pile.

    Great people, bright, and fun to talk to. But it is like a kid growing up in Saudi Arabia... he probably isn't going to think like a Catholic kid! They have grown up in a world where guns are portrayed as evil, and it takes some experiences that challenge that belief to catalyze thought and change.
     
  6. mpholic

    mpholic

    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2004
    When is it prudent?

    Carrying openly is not a method of reeduction it is more like shoving it down the sheeple's throat. Ha! I'm carrying a handgun, it's legal and you CAN'T do anything about it. I dare you to vote anti gun next election. Not to mention it's tactically unsound.

    We should be educating the sheeple as to the handgun's effectiveness for self defense, it's safety when handled properly. Dispelling myths about "evil guns". Garnering interest in the shooting sports, etc.

    Carrying openly may desensitize the sheeple but it won't change their opinions about guns and may even have a backlash effect. I am desensitized to excessive, gratutious vulgarity, violence and sexuality in motion pictures but it doesn't mean I approve of it or that I wouldn't vote to control it (sorry, the first ammendment wasn't created to protect this garbage). Organized open carry visits to businesses who have signs prohibiting guns (like I have seen mentioned here before)are inconsiderate, belligerent, and inflammatory. It's their property and they have the right to set the rules as to it's usage. Rich Emmelmans approach to this problem (Subway) of writing a letter to the owner and explaining his situation and requesting the sign be removed was the proper way to do it. If we strive to turn Indy into "Dodge City" than we may encourage the fence riders to join forces with the hard core antis and start repealing some of the gun rights we enjoy. I am not saying we need to hide or sneak around like we are breaking the law just have some consideration for the people who are uncomfortable around guns. Neither do I believe we should relinquish our right to carry openly (slippery slope and all) I just believe there are very few instances where open carry are necessary.

    I know this is a very unpopular opinion on this board but I still believe in it. Sorry if it offends anyone.
     
  7. epsylum

    epsylum Boolit Hoze

    Messages:
    3,868
    Likes Received:
    4
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Location:
    Racing Capital, USA
    I agree with your post except for this part (which has nothing to do with guns oddly enough).

    That makes as much sense as saying the second amendment wasn't created to protect our right to own semi-autos or EBRs.

    The short answer is, yes, yes it was. I have no problem with your disliking what you see in movies and TV, that is your right. If you don't like it, don't watch it and allow others to come to their own conclusions as well.

    THAT is what our founding fathers wanted.
     
  8. mpholic

    mpholic

    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2004
    Good analogy. I guess the slippery slope principle applies to more than just gun rights.

    It sill makes me uncomfortable to see people hiding behind the first to justify such depravity or using it to legitimize the burning of the flag.
     
  9. epsylum

    epsylum Boolit Hoze

    Messages:
    3,868
    Likes Received:
    4
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Location:
    Racing Capital, USA
    While I think flag burners are complete a-holes, I do see it as speech and it should be protected. They have a right to do it if it is their flag, but I have a right to think they are POSes to disgrace the US flag and everything it stands for.
     
  10. FThorn

    FThorn TV/Movie Club

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Funny, I have another (internet) friend from Australia who visited San Francisco last week and witnessed a shooting! I told him IMPOSSIBLE.. guns are illegal in California! :)