Armed Protest at Ohio Statehouse
- Thread starter Richard G
- Start date
It is weird how each state is different in its gun laws. In Virginia you are required to carry your weapon concealed. To expose it, even accidentally, could result in being charged with "brandishing," which carries a fine and could even result in losing your permit.
Mr Manifesto
Illuminator
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2003
- Messages
- 4,815
Don't forget to pack lots of clips. Make sure your gun is cocked, fully loaded, with the safety off.
Ian Osborne
JREF Kid
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2001
- Messages
- 8,957
Re: armed march
Why? Would the fine, upstanding gun owners of Ohio shoot them?
Bentspoon said:
Why? Would the fine, upstanding gun owners of Ohio shoot them?
Mr Manifesto said:
Modern pistols use magazines, not clips. A clip is just a bent piece of metal used to hold cartridges together. A mag has a spring or other device to feed ammo into the chamber when the slide or bolt goes forward. And remember, guns only "go off" when the trigger is pulled.
You should know more about your "enemies", learn how to talk about guns without sounding "uninformed". Know your enemies dude.
Ranb
corplinx
JREF Kid
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 8,952
Mr Manifesto said:
Condition 1 carry is for single action semiautos. You carry the gun with a round loaded in the chamber and the safety on.
If you actually have to draw and fire your weapon for the sake of your life, studies show you most likely wont have the time or state of mind to rack the slide at that point.
Typically you carry a glock (hybrid action) or a double action semi auto with a round in the chamber and _no safety_ on. The trigger pull on the first round of a double action pistol is so heavy that you simply dont need a manual safety.
The main thing is, all pistols have the same safety mechanism no matter what. They won't go off unless you put your finger on the trigger and press it. They won't go off if you drop them down a flight of stairs or if you sneeze wrong. You keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to fire.
Even the Iraqis we are training are learning this, watch the news reports about the new Iraqi police and you'll see they keep their trigger finger on the side of their guns and not in the trigger guard like movie cops.
Abdul Alhazred
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2003
- Messages
- 6,023
corplinx said:
1911, cocked and locked.
The manifestual one might not understand what I just said (though I make no assumptions), but I'm pretty sure you will.
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
Re: Re: armed march
This was the question that immediately came to my mind, as well...
Ian Osborne said:
This was the question that immediately came to my mind, as well...
140 people showed. No one was shot. (gasp) http://www.ofcc.net/article1549.html
More news coming.
More news coming.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
That appears to have been very successful. I will suggest for our next WTO and anti-Bush protests, everyone is to come armed as well.
The Fool
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2002
- Messages
- 16,515
140? there seems to be some confusion. The articles you sited vary, more than 100, more than 120...you say 140. I noticed the headline on the audio clip from the radio station says 40...maybe a typo? Either way 140 is an admirable effort I bet this huge gathering has got the government sitting up and taking notice....LolRichard G said:
I'm a bit sad you didn't give us at least one more anecdote about how someone attempted to hassle you at the march but slunk away when they saw your gun..... Was it a big gun?
Tricky
Briefly immortal
That's right, Tony. And if those police try to infringe their rights, why those leftist protestors are justified in using "deadly force" against them.Tony said:
Tricky
Briefly immortal
Ain't no "perhaps" about it. More than once you have advocated the use of force when what you perceive as your rights are threatened. If it is okay for you, it okay for leftists too. In fact, by your logic, you would be justified in shooting a cop who was giving you a speeding ticket, because he was infringing on your "right" to drive as you wish.Tony said:
Do you begin to understand why I have problems with your advocacy of deadly force?
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
Tony said:
But you have already been quite clear on your opinions.
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29681
According to Tony, people should be allowed to fire on police officers who are exercising their duty after these people have determined that the police officer in question is incorrectly carrying out his duty.
Of course, that sort of thing is quite easy for any stupid coward to say while safe behind his computer. But in reality it would mean that vast numbers of people would have firearms and be expected to properly make life and death decisions in matter of moments by firing on police officers who are armed, who are quite good shots themselves, who are wearing body armor, who have had considerable weapons training, who have back-up weapons readily available, and who can easily call for professional help.
Based on my knowledge and experience, I can definitely say that it would that it take, at the very least, a truly extra-ordinary event to get me to shoot a police officer.