PDA

View Full Version : FRIDAY 1/22 -Bay Area Web Chat -Should it be easier to carry a loaded gun in public?


Liberty1
01-21-2010, 9:58 PM
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=36952&forum_id=12&jump_to=630280#p630280

The topic of the web chat will be: Should it be easier to carry a loaded gun in public?

Join the Contra Costa Times - Bay Area News Group web chat Friday, Jan. 22nd at 12:00pm.

Feel free to join in! You are all welcome to submit questions and/or comments for the guests during the live chat. Ben Van Houten from the Legal Community Against Violence and I will chat discuss the benefits of an armed society.


To participate click here: http://bit.ly/6wv65e

Doesn't sound like much of a "discussion"...

Swiss
01-22-2010, 7:48 AM
Thanks. Coming up in about 3 hours and it looks like you can leave comments right now.

Maestro Pistolero
01-22-2010, 10:59 AM
Just signed on and posted a comment.

sv_1
01-22-2010, 11:11 AM
Signing up...

Glock22Fan
01-22-2010, 11:19 AM
Just submitted quite a few comments and questions. So far, none of them have appeared.

pneutin
01-22-2010, 11:20 AM
None of my comments and questions addressed to Ben Van Houten of LCAV have been posted. Sadly not surprised

sv_1
01-22-2010, 11:23 AM
Hmmm, they must not like the challenge to the stats...

Mine haven't shown up either

Glock22Fan
01-22-2010, 11:27 AM
OK they have just started appearing.

Window_Seat
01-22-2010, 11:34 AM
None of my comments have been posted either. It's the "moderator's" discretion to post comments you have made. Our's will likely not make it... Should someone here test this, and say something like "anyone who owns a gun is crazy, and should be jailed forever!!"?

Erik.

lomalinda
01-22-2010, 11:34 AM
Glad someone from here's comments appeared as mine have yet to do so.

At least Griffen Dix's fantasies about homes with guns being far more likely to be filled with blood made it into the mix, though.

What a surprise.

wellerjohn
01-22-2010, 11:37 AM
It's hard to have a conversation with a monkey:sleeping:

pneutin
01-22-2010, 11:43 AM
LOL
So far I've posted 4 replies to challenge Ben Van Houten's anti-gun statements. None were posted

But just as a test, I posted this:
"All handguns should be banned in California. They are instruments of death whose only purpose is to kill."

And it was published to the chat in 12 seconds. Yes, I counted.
You could cut the bias in there with a knife.

lomalinda
01-22-2010, 11:47 AM
Some of the comments are well articulated and in our favor, so they aren't blocking all of them.

Perhaps there's such a preponderance of pro-gun stuff that their in-house Mark Lloyd-style "Diversity Czar" of their site has to deny most of them in order to "level the field."

sv_1
01-22-2010, 11:47 AM
I'm out. None of my questions to Ben or Dix have been posted... Big surprise.

Window_Seat
01-22-2010, 11:49 AM
[Comment From ND ND: ]
All handguns should be banned in California. They are instruments of death whose only purpose is to kill.

You never want to argue with this type. It does nothing, and they are incurable.

Erik.

Window_Seat
01-22-2010, 11:54 AM
One of my questions actually got posted, and it related to commercial drivers being able to carry openly.

Erik.

pneutin
01-22-2010, 12:02 PM
[Comment From ND ND: ]
All handguns should be banned in California. They are instruments of death whose only purpose is to kill.
You never want to argue with this type. It does nothing, and they are incurable.

Erik.

I am ND, I posted that comment. Just to clarify why--I posted many pro-gun arguments which never got posted to the chat, and I got frustrated. I wanted to gauge the bias with which they filter chat messages, so I posted that outrageous comment about how all handguns should be banned. Funnily enough, that message was immediately published to the chat.

Someone replied to my comment above that handguns were not designed to kill, and I replied saying "Yes you're correct. I only posted that to point out how biased the chat moderators are, since none of my challenges to Ben from LCAV are acknowledged"

Shortly thereafter, the moderator privately messaged me with a BS excuse saying Ben from LCAV couldn't keep up with all the questions and so they could only post some. To throw me a bone, they published a comment I made 30 minutes prior (lol).

SJgunguy24
01-22-2010, 12:04 PM
I got one comment posted

HowardW56
01-22-2010, 12:05 PM
The chat was slow, but every comment I made was posted...

Ben from LCAV provided better responses, but Dix from VPC just recited the playbook

chiefcrash
01-22-2010, 12:05 PM
hehe, i think i threw a few of 'em for a loop...

Window_Seat
01-22-2010, 12:07 PM
No you don't understand...I posted many pro-gun arguments which never got posted to the chat, and I got frustrated. I wanted to gauge the bias with which they filter chat messages, so I posted that outrageous comment about how all handguns should be banned. Funnily enough, that message was immediately published to the chat.

Sad... No the news media is not biased... And It was just as interesting to see how many "repeat" posters who were antis were able to get in...
:laugh::laugh:

Erik.

putput
01-22-2010, 12:08 PM
I got a couple in there but it was never answered. Too hard of a question I guess. I like how they just keep quoting flawed studies. It's all they have left...

Glock22Fan
01-22-2010, 12:15 PM
A number of mine were posted, but none of the ones where I stated that Dix was quoting biased sources and discredited studies and that people should stop taking anything that VPC or the Brady Bunch said as gospel.

Isn't Dix the guy who had his kid shot? The one who stood up at the O.C. supervisor's meeting a while back?

HowardW56
01-22-2010, 12:35 PM
A number of mine were posted, but none of the ones where I stated that Dix was quoting biased sources and discredited studies and that people should stop taking anything that VPC or the Brady Bunch said as gospel.

Isn't Dix the guy who had his kid shot? The one who stood up at the O.C. supervisor's meeting a while back?

I saw a comment on Dix quoting studies that were proven to be inaccurate

Darklyte27
01-22-2010, 2:38 PM
saw this just now after work, i dont know what to say..

bbq_ribs
01-22-2010, 7:38 PM
I also posted quite a few questions. Ben V kept referring to a study allegedly done from Texas DPS information.

Well, I *AM* in Texas, and wanted to point out that their study was very very flawed. NONE of my comments were allowed through, no matter how clear and thoughtful they were.

Ridiculous. Very biased, and that turkey kept glossing over very important questions. Most of the anti-gun types are like "Well, I don't think they should be allowed. I just don't. It makes me feel scared." That's about as elaborate as they get. No real valid reasons for not wanting open carry, other than some far fetched tales. Figures.

HKC
01-22-2010, 10:03 PM
Funny that I just saw this thread. I participated in that chat today under the name "Cesar".

Sent in a lot of questions and got 3 in.

I was actually pleasantly surprised that Janis Mara acknowledged that the Wild West shootouts that so many people predicted would happen with so many states going to shall issue, never did. She also made it a point to present a good question to Ben about Arizona that totally threw him for a loop.

Swiss
01-22-2010, 10:27 PM
I agree. I think Janis handled the article and the chat equitably.

Funny that I just saw this thread. I participated in that chat today under the name "Cesar".

Sent in a lot of questions and got 3 in.

I was actually pleasantly surprised that Janis Mara acknowledged that the Wild West shootouts that so many people predicted would happen with so many states going to shall issue, never did. She also made it a point to present a good question to Ben about Arizona that totally threw him for a loop.

Maestro Pistolero
01-22-2010, 10:36 PM
These comments under my real first name, Christopher, were posted:

In response to the repeated references to the debunked Texas study:

[Comment From Christopher Hoffman]
Ben, cite, please?
12:32
And another poster
[Comment From briankk]
Ben, can you give me a citation of that Texas study..
Then from Griffin Dix (Dix, what a great name for anti-gunners)
[Comment From Griffin Dix]
I do not want these people making life or death decisions in places where I go and take my family. . . .

My response:
[Comment From Christopher]
What if the decision made was to stop a rampage of a psychopath that was directed at your family. Would you take a chance with a homicidal killer, or with a person motivated to stop him?

[Comment From Griffin Dix]
Christopher - Even the police are trained not to shoot in crowded places because the chances are too great that some bystander will be shot.

[Comment From Christopher]
Of course Mr Dix, but that would be a moot point when rounds are being intentionally directed at innocent life. Any police officer will tell you that.
What a moron, worried about a possible accidental shooting, while intentional mass murder is taking place against his family. :rolleyes:

[Comment From Christopher]
If one could magically super-impose the violent crime rate of concealed carry permit holders on to the rest of the country, we'd think we were in Switzerland, where everyone is issued a REAL assault weapon by the government. There is near-zero violent crime in Switzerland

And finally:
[Comment From Christopher]
Mr Dix, please stop quoting the violence policy center, it undermines your credibility. They are a partisan, anti-second amendment group whose tactics include repeating lies often enough to be considered facts.

bigcalidave
01-22-2010, 11:15 PM
Wow there were some stupid comments on that chat. Ben V and the griffin dix idiot really live in a fantasy world. It's so annoying when there are good questions being asked, and skipped over for more propaganda nonsense.

spddrcr
01-22-2010, 11:55 PM
I couldnt even get into the chat but as someone who has witnessed several law enforcement agencies run requalifications as well as several other groups such as homeland security I wouldnt want to have to trust my life to one of them when it comes to firearms.

Im willing to bet 80% of these "officers" couldnt make it through an IDPA match or any other type of action pistol matchwith out DQ'ing, and the other 20% only because they actually shoot matches and practice with their firearms more then once a month.

this really was a one sided discussion, none of the ANTI's could cite any of the facts they posted and i wouldnt be surprised if they had the various anti websites open to copy and paste from.