I live in a country where carrying weapons isn’t a thing. But being that it’s lawfull in the country where this comic is supposedly happening can you imagine walking into a bar and some random chick starts screaming at you like that?
Imagine if instead of a chick screaming about the guy it would be a guy screaming about a chick with purple hair?
My first thought as well. But that’s a deeply sensitive topic in American election campaigns, so it’s safest for us outsiders to not express an opinion about it whatsoever.
Honestly I’ll take the down votes over keeping to myself, some things just need to be said.
I’m not defending the people who open carry, I’m just pointing out how promoting hate and outrage can’t be justified just because you agree with this particular case
It’s actually not legal to carry them in bars
Imagine if instead of a chick screaming about the guy it would be a guy screaming about a chick with purple hair?
I’m going to blow your mind here, but this was a comic strip and the character was drawn to be announcing things as a representation of what’s happening inside the mind of the subject walking. It’s an artistic/comedic effect and to take it literally or even remotely as a “both sides” issue is peak… something I can’t say without getting banned most likely.
imagine walking into a bar and some random chick starts screaming at you like that?
Imagine not knowing how comic strips work.
Purple hair doesn’t kill at distance, not as much as people claim it does.
Imagine if instead of a chick screaming about the guy it would be a guy screaming about a chick with purple hair?
Purple hair doesn’t kill people.
And comic strips aren’t meant to be taken literally as situations with nuance and reversibility. It’s an artist sharing a message of their own, you can take it or leave it, to “both sides” it makes me deeply puzzled.
If it were any other period in history I would be astonished that anyone could take the actions of an artistic device as literal interpretations of events, real or hypothetical… but then I remind myself that millions of men have just explained to women why bears are more dangerous when presented with the question which was feared more, so I am now convinced that nobody can see outside their own bubble-universes anymore.
Regarding your last point: With the various engagement-increasing algorithms driving what information you actually see, it can be a challenge to see outside your own bubble. It takes active effort to not just see your own perspective reflected back at you and that’s by design.
A lot of people won’t engage with content they disagree with and engagement drives ad revenue so it behooves companies that only care about revenue to not challenge a user’s beliefs unless it’s something extreme enough for the user to engage out of rage and disgust (which is how chuds like Andrew Tate get promoted). It’s hard to see the otherside’s genuine viewpoint when it’s constantly filtered through the lens of your own side (or what the algorithm thinks your side is).
Neither does the act of putting a gun in a holster, does it? It’s not like she’s screaming at a guy brandishing a gun around, was she? Now that would be something worthy of screaming about.
Neither does the act of putting a gun in a holster, does it?
Lol look up accidental deaths from guns in the US. Having a gun in any situation ups the chance someone will be shot or die. We hear about it on the news all the time. People left their gun in a bathroom, people didn’t use their holster right and shot themselves/someone else, a child got their parent’s gun and harmed themselves or someone else. I’ve literally watched people drop their gun out of the shitty holsters they buy.
So yes. Yes it does actually.
And which of those situations are improved by you screaming at a person walking around with a holstered gun? Does it make them more likely to conceal carry or not bring a gun at all? I would say in most situations, people who already open carry will be more encouraged to do so by your actions.
I consider actions like these as being more damaging to the anti-gun movement than anything.
Ok, being that I am on the spectrum myself I really hope this doesn’t come across offensive: are you autistic?
Because that’s the only way I can fathom you taking this literally. It’s a comic. I can assure you the artist never did this in real life. They are using art as an expression to point out that this dude’s entire bearing - the way he carries himself, the fact that he chooses to aggressively display his firearm, the clothing that he wears - is accomplishing the exact same thing that the woman in the comic is doing. It is intended to obnoxious, as it is pointing out that he is obnoxious for portraying himself that way.
Metaphor, allegory, art, my friend. It’s not literal.
When judging the action presented in the comics, who really cares whether it happened or not. I’m not judging the author for something he did, but something that a lot of people in this thread seems to be cheering for, which is to scream at people for doing something they disagree with and think as pathetic. You know, the type of behaviour that the American Conservative like to do to people they don’t like. Those kinds of behaviour are just horrible, imo, regardless of how good your intention for doing it is.
As for whether I’m autistic, I don’t know. I’ve never tried getting a diagnosis.
Art is catharsis. People who are “cheering” for it are doing so because it resonates with them, because seeing a jackass get ridiculed and made uncomfortable is a reversal of the usual state of things, not because they think it’s actually a good idea. The juxtaposition of a woman loudly narrating the exact thing that the guy is already wordlessly broadcasting is not to paint the action as anyone’s goal but to give those of us who feel terrorized by someone trying to show off how “badass” they are a bit of a laugh. It’s not a vote or endorsement for that kind of behavior; it’s more like an expression of schadenfreude or an acknowledgement of intrusive thoughts.
With your reasoning there isn’t a problem either with bringing a nuclear bomb into a bar. What? I’m not setting it off! I’m just sitting here enjoying my drink with my nuke right next to me. I’m not bothering anyone, so why is the entire town running in fear? Pussies! That’s what I say. It’s not like I’m going to use this…
I carry a gun. Inside my waistband and under a shirt like a fucking adult. Open carrying out in the wilderness, for work or on a range is understandable.
Randos carrying in public is pure cringe and is super counterproductive to the goal of practical responsible gun ownership as I see it.
“Randos carrying in public is pure cringe” they said, after saying they carry in public just in a concealed manner.
You know what I mean, open carrying.
Concealed carry isn’t a fashion statement or anything political. It’s a personal choice not something to intimidate or rub in people’s faces.
I have the legal ability to, I have the training to do it safely, so I do. That’s literally the extent of it.
You believing that your country is so unsafe that you need to have a weapon on you at all times, that’s political as fuck, even if you conceal it.
Hell, the second you have to bend to pick up something you’re not fooling anyone anymore, we all know you’re carrying.
Umm yeah we live in a society. I worked as a firefighter for years. I know the response times for police and fire/ems and they aren’t that good.
Appendix solves a lot of this. Printing can happen but a ton of it is easily avoided
Yeah, being a first responder really changed my perspective on a lot of “safe” areas" and how far help is.
When you have one lone deputy in your entire county for a good portion of the night (and frequently only 2-3 cars during the day), and state is just on call, not patrolling… you can easily be 45 minutes out from LEO, that’s been a very long wait before…
of all the motives to be against open carry, putting cringe as one of them is … cringe.
Everyone else did a good job of listing the rest so I figured it was implied so here goes.
Open carrying makes you a bigger target to hypothetical mass shooters because you are the biggest threat to them and will be targeted first before you can react.
It makes you a bigger target to hypothetical robbers who use your weapon to size up how much money you have/make.
It is clearly visible so the chance of social interaction goes up (see comic)
It puts guns as front and center as your whole personality. Showing anything as your whole personality is not great, but something controversial and divisive is worse.
And nearly all of this is avoidable by simply concealed carrying if you want to be armed.
yeah as I said, a lot of good motives, mentioning cringe is childish
of all the motives to be against open carry, putting cringe as one of them is … cringe.
If you say so
I appreciate the art in this strip, it’s well drawn, the flow is nice, I like the heavy contrast which complements the tone of the message.
It’s just, I prefer comics to be funny.
I prefer the comments to add something to the discussion. I guess we were both disappointed.
Ironic
“Thank god you’re here, man openly carrying! I feel so much safer around you!”
“Heh. Yeah, I’m sure. People respect me when I’m carrying.”
“Oh, no, I don’t mean it like that. I mean that if an actual gunman starts shooting, you’re a much higher priority target, giving me enough time to run away. Thank you for painting a target on yourself for us!”
Yeah you definitely get a daily carry that’s under 600 bucks. Even that’s a lot. You get your nice gun in that evidence locker and you aren’t ever getting it back.
Open carriers show off two major things, and neither one of them are “tough guy”.
First is fragile masculinity, they are worried that they aren’t seen as “manly” enough, so they have to show off to everyone that they are totally manly. It’s like women wearing that new handbag out and about, they want others to notice it.
Second is pure fear, fear that at any time any moment something is going to happen, and the only way they feel safe is by carrying a lethal weapon with them at all times. You know, rather than dealing with what is causing the fear in the first place.
So, we have a terrified person carrying a lethal weapon who is worried about what everyone around them think. To me, that’s the more worrying person in a room.
I have a friend who open carries everywhere as well. We do not live in a dangerous area at all and he carries this thing to the grocery store.
I call it his “big boy gun” because it makes him feel like he’s a big boy now, like a kid who wears his “big boy” pants with no diapers.
I had the talk with a friend once who did it, told him I didn’t feel comfortable. We went to a fast food place and told him to look around, people weren’t admiring him, they were afraid of him. Luckily he saw reason and stopped wearing it shortly after.
I call it his “big boy gun”
Good! And I hope you never let him hear the end of it. What a poser.
Fear? My impression is that they’re looking for trouble, not trying to avoid it.
Nah they say they are, but they’re scared boys walking around with it. The like to LARP thinking they’ll need to use it, but actually using it on someone is terrifying.
Stupidity goes in there too for baiting any and every psycho who can now instantly become an armed psycho.
Fear indeed. I went to college in a very… provincial small city. Riding my bicycle around, I was regularly harassed by insecure assholes in pickup trucks, and run off the road twice. The one time I managed to get a license plate, the police claimed that without witnesses, they couldn’t do anything. ACAB.
I added my 1911 to the strap of my messenger bag, at the top of my left shoulder, where the stainless frame would be plainly visible. I was suddenly given plenty of space on the road and even got occasional compliments when waiting at stoplights. It’s disgusting that I would be a target for bullying without my pistol, but suddenly I was an okay guy with my penis extension where douchebag drivers could see it.
So yeah, I’m living proof that non-military open carry is only for scaredy cats.
The one time I managed to get a license plate, the police claimed that without witnesses, they couldn’t do anything. ACAB.
It sucks but unless he hurt you, hit your bike, or you have any sort of footage what is the police suppose to do? Show up, he denies everything and that’s it.
If they could charge him on your claims alone, think about the scary consequences of such a “legal” system.
It sucks but unless he hurt you, hit your bike, or you have any sort of footage what is the police suppose to do?
It’s worth noting that most American states have a “3 foot law” that requires vehicles to pass bikers with at least 3 feet of space. (Often, drivers are also required to completely change lanes when doing so, although that varies more by state and by the width of the lane on that particular road.) If a driver in one of the 39 states runs a biker off the road, even if they never physically contacted the person on the bike, they almost certainly violated the “3 foot law.”
Yes, police often won’t investigate or bring charges, and yes, it sucks, but most of those dangerous drivers are indeed breaking the law.
I never questioned that. I even went with OP’s story, chose to believe they told the complete truth. But they complained about police not doing anything and the shitty reality of it is that without any kind of evidence the police cannot do anything.
I think we’re both in agreement about the result, but we shouldn’t forget that testimony is evidence. The chump behind the wheel will deny it, so you’ll have conflicting testimonial evidence, but until recently, this was usually all the evidence any prosecutor had. We’ve gotten too used to video evidence and now police won’t act without it, even though it’s not legally required. It just provides a convenient excuse for cops not to bother when they don’t care.
OK, you’re right. Ideally, the police should just follow up and not predict the result since that’s the judge’s job, not theirs.
I don’t think there are many countries with such a low crime rate where police can really work that close to the book though. And I think there are “better” examples for “ACAB” in the US.
By this measure, justice was impossible to achieve before the invention of the cell phone video camera.
Yes, you do need some kind of evidence if you don’t have a witness. And I mentioned other kinds of evidence than video footage.
In most jurisdictions, a note could be put on the driving record. If a pattern on aggressive driving were to be established, a prosecutorial or civil suit effort would have an easier time of litigating against that driver.
In my case, yes, there was paint damage from my bike, which would be evidence.
Edit to add: this was a bit before camera phones.
In my case, yes, there was paint damage from my bike, which would be evidence.
For sure, that should’ve been more than enough for them to act at least. I’m sorry this happened to you.
what is the police suppose to do?
Start a paper trail. If multiple unconnected bikers report them or they are involved in an accident later it is prior evidence of reckless driving.
Even if he denies it when police show up to ask questions it might scare him enough to stop doing it.
I wonder if 3d printing a fake handle to stick out is worth the trouble.
Being licensed anyway would be good if you were stopped, but it would weigh less and you wouldn’t risk losing it.
Presume there’s laws about leaving it unsupervised etc while out the house.
Having a toy is just as good for that purpose.
You won’t be treated as if it’s a toy though.
Loved the comparison to an expensive handbag. These people just want to look fierce and make other people feel in danger.
Just wait until you get all the hens clucking at their favorite restaurant about how stylish it looks with the wood-grain finish.
Remember folks, if your firearm is worth more than you are; showing it is like flashing your wallet.
You’re walking in an alley and encounter a man. Would you rather bear arms or not bear arms?
Honestly? Nearly a decade of working contract security, including most of that time being level 3,
I can easily say that I’d rather not be armed.
First, carrying visible weapons makes people respond differently. They see you’re armed and everyone reacts to it. Its mere presence escalates situations.
Secondly, your very question implies the trap always being armed leads to- you assume this man is aggressive or hostile. And most often that assumption is flat wrong.
When all you have is a hammer every problem looks like a nail.
Finally, situation awareness is infinitely more valuable than any weapon. You lose every fight you get into. Even if the other guy doesn’t harm you, if you draw down and shoot, you’re going to jail. You’re going to be held until they know what happened, and you’re probably getting charged.
You lose on legal fees. You probably lose your job. And now you have to live with guilt- even if the subject had it coming.
Also just a side note I was discussing open carry. Concealed is a different matter; concealed properly, no one will know until you draw. (And then things escalate fucking fast.)
There are actual reasons for people to open carry a gun. Main goal is to normalize it. Where I live a lot of people open carry, and it’s no big deal, no one really cares or notices.
My neighbor moved here from California though, and she was initially terrified every time she saw someone carrying a gun here. But after awhile she got used to it as well. I haven’t asked her what her current opinion is on guns, but I know she went from terrified to not caring, which would be considered a positive change from the people who are open carrying around town.
That said, I don’t get the impression that most people who open carry are doing it for that reason, usually seems like it more because they want to show off.
Normalize carrying rpg’s to the grocery store to protect yourself from dad pranks like tapping your shoulder
/s
Inferiority complexes do that to people.
Main reasons historically were for work or hunting … maaayybe to make sure you don’t leave the gun somewhere or forget you have it while transporting it.
Congratulations on a take just about perfectly as shitty as most of the replies you’ve got so far. Just. Wow.
Why should we normalize carrying weapons around in daily life?
It makes sense when you realize these people are abject fucking cowards that can’t leave the house without their emotional support firearm.
They have to protect themselves from all the people carrying weapons around them, of course!
Because people want to look cool and not be judged for it!
They yearn for the old cowboy days.
Old cowboy days often involved checking your weapon into lockup at the edge of town…
Armed queers don’t get bashed.
Maybe instead of arming queers to shoot bigots, we do something societally about the bigots?
Because I am not seeing how the queer person getting tried for murder or manslaughter helps matters.
I’ll check back with you in 50 years on that societal change. Meanwhile, people that want to protect themselves against violent bigots within their lifetime should probably get a gun.
A gun and some time on death row to go with it.
Because if someone lives in a place where their life is at threat just by being queer and existing to the point that they have to kill someone, they have no chance of finding a sympathetic jury.
I’d rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6.
Yes, very good, you know a famous saying.
Doesn’t make it a bad idea to reduce the chance of getting in trouble. You’re just putting them in a corner by chastising them for finding a way to protect themselves.
When did I chastise them? If they want to take that risk, on their shoulders be it.
Maybe instead of arming queers to shoot bigots, we do something societally about the bigots?
Since there’s no practical way to do something about the fact that bigots exist, the next best thing is to constantly appropriate their aesthetic.
Make open-carrying a gay fashion statement until the only folks who open-carry are the gays.~
No, they get shot instead, much better /s
Citation needed.
You first.
What claim did he make that require a citation?
Rachel fucking Maddow probably lol
Agreed, but a concealed weapon keeps you just as safe. Maybe even safer.
You can tell this was a good question because they didn’t answer it.
If your purpose is to normalize it, and it’s normal where you live, then you can stop.
Main goal is to normalize it.
There is a period of US history well known for open carrying.
It’s also a period of US history well known for shootings.
Normalize something that shouldn’t exist, and has no reason to?
Good old Lemmy, where providing a different perspective gets you downvoted to hell simply because it’s not the popular view. I’d even say we are much worse than Reddit when it comes to this, which is ironic.
Several Lemmy communities just straight up delete non-groupthink opinions, even if they don’t violate any apparent rules. That’s way worse here than reddit ever was.
Are you not familiar with how The_Donald operated or how r/Conservative still operates? There are plenty of subreddits that censor any and all dissenting viewpoints. It happens here too, but I think Reddit’s much worse.
Good old Lemmy, where providing a different perspective gets you downvoted to hell simply because it’s not the popular view.
You mean the view “let’s normalize making life more dangerous for no reason?”
He’s only offering a reason, not necessarily that he supports the reason. Are you guys so fragile in your beliefs that you can’t even handle a simple suggestion of a benefit to an opposing view?
A suggestion of a benefit to open-carrying does not equal endorsement, nor does it mean opposing the view that open-carrying can be dangerous. Try to be more open-minded.
Are you guys so fragile in your beliefs that you can’t even handle a simple suggestion of a benefit to an opposing view?
What was the benefit again? Normalizing doing it is not a benefit on its own.
“Can someone explain the benefit of wearing your underwear on the outside of your pants?”
“To normalize wearing your underwear on the outside of your pants”
So it’s just a fashion statement then?
When someone asks “seriously, what is the argument for doing this, what is the benefit?” A response that exists solely of “to get other people to do it too” does not answer the question as to why that is desirable.
If we move the theoretical out of fashion and into safety, such as someone complaining about people insisting on lying face down in the middle of the street, a response of “they do this to normalize people lying face down in the middle of the street” should not be received well. All it’s doing is advocating for making people less safe with zero justification as to why.
Normalize carrying a deadly weapon that can near-instantly kill several people at once everywhere you go… You realize how insane that sounds, right!? Other countries are laughing at us!
I see no reason to normalize open carry when even just owning a firearm, on its own, increases your chance to be killed by a gun for both suicide and homicide. Firearm ownership itself should not be normalized, as a matter of public health.
I get that it makes people feel safer, but it does not actually make them safer. If you don’t have an obvious reason to have a firearm, like defending livestock, living in a high-risk environment, or as protection against wild animals, then you are objectively safer not owning one.
You were so concerned with the undesirability of fear that you forgot why humans naturally experience fear in the first place.
“Don’t worry, if you keep your hand on the burner long enough, you’ll feel nothing at all!”
We need more public pole arms and coinbags made of worn leather sashed onto one’s great belt.
More ninja outfits. More people dressed up like Joker. I want peak Joker.
This person missed the memo and showed up as a clown 🤡 instead of THE clown.
The most fantastic thing about the Joker is that Gotham police haven’t just drilled his ass with six dozen rounds to the funny bone during an arrest.
Hell, this guy runs around with not one but two hyenas on the regular, and even they don’t get shot.
One of the things that really angers me about supposed second amendment supporters is their quiet acceptance of laws infringing on my right to bear any arm that is not a gun. In most states where it is legal to carry guns around, there are way more restrictions on carrying things like knives, swords, polearms, etc.
Reminds me of messer blades. Basically local governments said swords weren’t allowed so the people made extra long “knives” with a few sword features removed. Very similar to AR “pistols” today
But yeah good ole fashioned medieval weapons would be awesome to try out and own
What about joker weddings?
All I’m reading here is “How dare people do something I disagree with in public?”.
To be fair, I’m no US American, so I wouldn’t know if open carrying itself is a problem, instead of just being a political statement.
I reading it as have look 5000 bucks on his hip.
Have you ever heard of the expression “When you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail”?
If that is what this comic is about, then why specifically single out open carrying?
Because gun violence is a huge problem in the USA.
I meant open-carrying compared to concealed carrying, both have similar impacts on gun violence I imagine, while the comic only ridicules open carrying.
It’s not really an actual problem more than it is a fashion statement, which is against the ideals of people trying to use it as a legitimate self defense tool if all else fails.
Most people want to live a normal life. Go to places with family and friends etc. Having a gun is a personal choice, and those that choose to carry usually feel that if they have the capability to carry legally and safely to do so just in case no other help can get to you in time. Similar to wearing a seatbelt without expecting an accident to occur. And if it’s not for you it’s okay we understand.
Open carry has a place. On police officers, in wilderness areas where predators are common, and on range days. But at a restaurant or store is NOT one of those places you should open carry even if you can legally.
It brings all the attention to you and your gun and usually gives off a negative first impression. Any “bad guy” will simply target you first and by surprise. Or take your gun’s value as a sign of how much expendable income you have. And it brings about unwanted interactions as seen in the comic, but if you are open carrying maybe you are probably looking for that reaction and in that case it’s not purely self defense it’s attention seeking and that’s on them.
I carry a concealed gun when I can, I respect responsible gun owners but open carry people are not responsible in my eyes. They make us all look bad imo.
You’re also leaving out that some people feel uncomfortable around firearms. Always forgetting about empathy. I could walk around with clothing that makes people feel uncomfortable, but I don’t because that would be inconsiderate of me.
Also, just FYI, even CC doesn’t really help you. It puts you more at risk in most cases, and it’s often especially bad when dealing with cops. Of course that depends a lot on where you are and what you look like though. Some cops might show you respect for CCing, rather than the typical fear and panic. If you need to use it, a “good guy with a gun” looks exactly the same as the bad guy.
I’m not sure I follow, you are after all in your right to dress how you see fit even if someone else finds it uncomfortable. Pardon the obvious, but quite a few people are uncomfortable around queer people, and you know damn well the queer should never apologize for that!
I believe open carrying is linked strongly to the identity of these people (but, you know, stupider), the same way people wear anarchist symbols or define themselves as Marxist/Leninists/whatever. They live the “don’t step on me” life. And as long as it stays as a political statement itself, it’s their right.
Open carrying of course has a lot more problems with it than a pride flag on your shirt, but that doesn’t seem to be what the comic is about.
The uncomfortable people feel around firearms is much different than around queer people. Hand guns are designed to kill people. That’s the only reason these exist. It’s fear of life for some people, which is pretty reasonable. I’m sure that’s part of the point though. People are less likely to confront them when they do something bad because they fear retaliation.
It’s also not a part of who they are. Queer people are queer. People who open carry aren’t different when they don’t open carry. It doesn’t change who they are internally if they don’t open carry.
We take people’s comfort into account in society. I can’t walk around exposing myself, for example, because it makes people uncomfortable. You can walk around exposing your weapon though, which is likely just as bad or worse for some people.
It goes further than that too. Personally, I wouldn’t wear a piece of clothing designed to offend someone. (Note: not the same as someone being offended by something else, like a pride flag, that isn’t designed to offend.) I’m pretty confident most people do this because it’s the right thing to do. Hopefully people who own firearms have empathy and consider how it makes others feel, and also don’t want to make people uncomfortable.
It’s also not a part of who they are. Queer people are queer. People who open carry aren’t different when they don’t open carry. It doesn’t change who they are internally if they don’t open carry.
I hope you don’t need me to point out the uncomfortable parallelism here: You can be a lib. owning jackass at home, but don’t be it in public, please conform to societal norms.
Again, it’s not open carrying to make anyone uncomfortable to them, it’s expressing who they are politically. Just that the way they chose to express it is inherently problematic, but nonetheless, personal expression trumps making others uncomfortable.
Yeah it goes without saying that a gun being displayed out in the open by an unknown person is going to make people uncomfortable, and nobody will want to talk to them.
I’ve talked with my local cops when I was a firefighter. They are okay with concealed carry and understand it’s a increasingly common thing. They told me to be sure my weapon was holstered or dropped as soon as it isn’t needed anymore and wait for them to arrive.
Long response times in my area is the biggest thing for me. That’s not just a factor for guns but also for the medical stuff and fire extinguisher I have in my car because fire/ems is the same way.
I appreciate this dialog, and I encourage all carriers to go and introduce yourself to the cops. Especially if you are not white or neuro-typical.
Definition of a try hard.
We only see him from the back, but two guns for him and one for Quato.
What happened to his SCAR-L? Did he forget it in the bathroom?
I really hope this was at a competition. If this guy dresses up like this just to go out, he’s got to have a horrible personality.
What kind of crazy competition would this guy fit into?
He needs to read up on what a “3 gun competition” really means because it’s not this.
Imagine a blind date in a public place with this like… Wtf do you do when the Self Punisher shows up?
🧑🌾❌
🐻🫦
Who needs a personality when you’ve got guns
GUN is definitely my favorite flavor of Powerthirst
How ironic would it be if this guy was killed in a knife fight.
King shit.
Ok this made me chuckle out loud… thanks for that.
I was getting into my car the other day and noticed someone getting out of their car and putting a pistol into their wasteband. Looked like they were going into a Buffalo wild wings or something. Like, are you gonna shoot someone in there or what?
My thing is, you’re usually introducing a firearm into a situation where there likely wasn’t one previously, and are putting at risk the lives of everyone around you. I own a firearm and I hope every day I never ever have to use it outside of recreation. Most gun owners are exceptionally irresponsible and don’t give weapons their due respect, this is half the reason so many people get shot for no reason in the US.
Why would you present yourself as the annoying and ridiculous one?
Bold move, given the propensity for guys like this to fly off the handle in a Gay Panic of Self Defense.
I’ve found the 2nd Amendnent Remedy is mostly about remedying use of the 1st.
