Someone who needs a course in Idioit.101

What is it going to take to convince these people that the average person is NOT okay with them openly walking around with large, intimidating weapons on them?

Oh, the shiny black metal fuels their testosterone so that there is no convincing them. The person with the biggest weapon is always in the right.

Idiots.

blacbird said:

Yeah, dude, like I see you walking around the airport with an AR-15 and I should assume you're a "peaceful, responsible gun owner". Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. Especially given the history of mass killings of strangers in public places via guns.

Click to expand...

Screw the mass shootings. Hijacked airplanes anyone?

There are plenty of responsible gun owners out there, but gun rights advocacy and activism attract some doozies. There's a huge difference between keeping a handgun or hunting rifle in your home or carrying a handgun in an inconspicuous way, and carrying large, threatening guns in public. Especially in places where people might already be concerned about safety.

I want to know exactly what "activists" like these intend to accomplish. I was going to ask if they expect their behavior to make people more comfortable around guns, but I suspect their agendas aren't that well-calculated. I think they simply want to make a statement and show off that they can do what they want. That form of activism can actually be good and effective sometimes, but it's not effective with something like gun rights, where the major opposition revolves around the fact that guns actually do pose a safety concern. Playing into those concerns isn't exactly bright.

A researcher who uses the word "never."

Huh.

I believe their aim (pun not intended) is to show people that guns themselves aren't actually dangerous and that someone with one isn't necessarily going to shoot them.

Yeah. I know.

The fact is that guns are dangerous, and given how fast a situation can explode, I can only see it as smart to assume anyone you see with a gun could be a threat.

I personally think we should hold gun manufacturers liable for their weapons as well. I'm tired of hearing the rhetoric "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." Yeah, well, Cigarettes don't kill people, cancer does. But we still hold tobacco companies responsible for the harm their products do.

He's a researcher at the neurological institute? Maybe he got too close to something that affected his neurological abilities? Because how does the public tell a 'peaceful, responsible gun-owner' from a dangerous, irresponsible gun-owner, at a distance, before the shooting starts? Because if we could only get a reliable test, we could stop some of these shootings.
Really, what if he had wandered into the view of some traveler who was already scared of flying, who freaked out at what he, quite reasonably, thought was a terrorist? Or some gung-ho officer who was just waiting for a terrorist so he could be a hero?
Police at Vancouver International Airport Tasered a guy to death for pointing a stapler at them.

One of the reasons why people get nervous about guns is that it can be hard to know just from looking at someone whether they're a peaceful, responsible gun owner or not. Even if there haven't been a lot of mass shootings lately, a civilian carrying an assault rifle is going to turn heads. That's not a typical gun that people would routinely carry with them. And since shootings do happen, I don't think telling people not to be concerned if they see someone walking around with an assault rifle is the right message to send. It's also possible for someone to generally support gun ownership but also believe that there are instances when it's good to be wary of guns. I support free speech and am glad our constitution protects it, but if I came across someone in public who was saying threatening or suspicious stuff, I would be wary of them.

His message fails because he's not demonstrating responsible gun ownership. Responsible gun owners don't go carrying around excessive guns just because they can, when they know that the weapons will be regarded as threatening.

Whether he's a threat or not is almost beside the point. How much effort would it take for someone who *is* a threat to come up behind him with a cosh and take his responsibly owned gun from him?

ShaunHorton said:

What is it going to take to convince these people that the average person is NOT okay with them openly walking around with large, intimidating weapons on them?

Click to expand...

Because... Constitution!

Most people don't actually think about the fact that there are logical limits to provisions in the Bill of Rights.

They see "Freedom of Speech" (which isn't the wording in the document) and translate that into "I can say whatever I want, and you can't do anything about it!" But all the document says is that Congress can't pass any laws abridging your right to free speech. You're still responsible for the words coming out of your mouth and any consequences that arise from them. You still can't yell fire in a crowded theater.

And that's what happens when someone brings a firearm - especially an openly carried, assault-style firearm - into a place where policy says you shouldn't carry them. Especially an airport, where crossing the security check means you're in international territory.

You aren't expressing your right to "bear arms;" you're expressing your own stupidity. You're yelling fire in a theater full of people already terrified of smelling smoke at any moment.

Cyia said:

You still can't yell fire in a crowded theater.

Click to expand...

I yelled fire in a crowded theatre. Mind you, I was watching a Michael Bay movie.

"There is never anything to fear from peaceful, responsible gun owners."

Maybe.

But a person who thinks it's a good idea to bring an AR-15 to the airport (or coffee shop, restaurant, kids' playground,etc.) is, by my definition, NOT responsible, therefore, must be feared. Who knows what other unreasonable decisions they may make?

Cyia said:

Because... Constitution!

Most people don't actually think about the fact that there are logical limits to provisions in the Bill of Rights.

They see "Freedom of Speech" (which isn't the wording in the document) and translate that into "I can say whatever I want, and you can't do anything about it!" But all the document says is that Congress can't pass any laws abridging your right to free speech. You're still responsible for the words coming out of your mouth and any consequences that arise from them. You still can't yell fire in a crowded theater.

And that's what happens when someone brings a firearm - especially an openly carried, assault-style firearm - into a place where policy says you shouldn't carry them. Especially an airport, where crossing the security check means you're in international territory.

You aren't expressing your right to "bear arms;" you're expressing your own stupidity. You're yelling fire in a theater full of people already terrified of smelling smoke at any moment.

Click to expand...

I like when people have that opinion over Freedom of speech. I like to invite them into a biker bar, insult the mothers of everyone inside, and then see if invoking "Freedom of Speech" will keep them from waking up in a hospital.

Responsible gun owners follow the laws, like not bringing firearms into an airport. What a stupid thing to do! I wouldn't mind that gun owner being locked up. No telling what the next responsible thing he chooses to do would be.

JulianneQJohnson said:

Responsible gun owners follow the laws, like not bringing firearms into an airport. What a stupid thing to do! I wouldn't mind that gun owner being locked up. No telling what the next responsible thing he chooses to do would be.

Click to expand...

There's no law against bringing firearms into the Phx airport - he'd done this same thing before, showed up to pick up his wife toting an assault rife, and been talked to but not arrested.

It's not legal in places where it's not legal, like NYC, and it's not legal to board a plane with a weapon that's not allowed, but just in the airport depends upon the city and airport regulations.

As to the rest of it, what DM said.

I don't get what his point would even theoretically be - don't worry when you see random people wandering about with assault rifles? Assume anyone openly armed is a "safe, responsible gun owner?" That doesn't make a lick of sense. I debate his stated premise, but regardless, his stated premise isn't in play, as far as I can see, as there's no way to discern what someone toting weaponry may or may not be intending.

In addition to the reasons mentioned above that this guy is an idiot, I would point out that even responsible gun owners can have accidents, have weapons stolen or, when shooting the bad guy that they apparently are prepared to take on in a crowded public place, mow down a few innocent bystanders. We are beset by fools.

As someone who owns, takes responsibility for, and shoots several types of firearms (targets and sporting clays), I can say without equivocation that dude is not only a fool, he's an irresponsible peckerhead.

Epic fail.

I agree with the prevailing sentiment, here.

Steinmetz removed the rifle from his shoulder, causing the muzzle to face a mother and her 17-year-old daughter, authorities said. They told police they feared for their lives.

Click to expand...

[Steinmetz] said Monday that his firearm "was never pointed at anyone" and he was just trying to make a political statement.

Click to expand...

I can believe that he had no intention of pointing his gun at anyone.

I can also believe that in the act of taking the rifle from his shoulder, the barrel swung down and was momentarily pointed at bystanders, who became legitimately concerned.

But it's an airport. People everywhere, in all directions, and probably above and below you as well. Some of these people are highly agitated, some nervous, some outright afraid. A lot of people won't even fly these days due to fears of terrorism or because of the security measures enacted to prevent it - or both. Who the hell brings an AR-15 into that mix and then has the gall to talk about how "responsible" they are, especially when there's someone saying, 'yo dude, your gun DID point at me, and it scared the shit out of me'?

Geesh.

ShaunHorton said:

What is it going to take to convince these people that the average person is NOT okay with them openly walking around with large, intimidating weapons on them?

Click to expand...

They know damned well that people aren't okay with it, which is why they do it. Some people live for terrifying others.

Responsible, law abiding gun owners should hate these people too, because they're doing their best their best to turn the public tide against guns.

Monkey said:

Who the hell brings an AR-15 into that mix and then has the gall to talk about how "responsible" they are, especially when there's someone saying, 'yo dude, your gun DID point at me, and it scared the shit out of me'?

Geesh.

Click to expand...

Rude assholes who think their right to bear arms trumps everything else. That's who.