Wouldn't it be awesome to open carry an AR15...

[WeekendWarrior]

WWRTW

[sevensix2x51]

Hahahaha, I UOC my AR's in my apartment almost every day! Yes, outside would be fun too - BLM land!

thats why you should buy a house while the market is down. i can concealed carry out in my yard! woohoo! 1 step closer to freedom!

[JTROKS]

Although it's legal to open carry my AR in my property I wouldn't dare do it to give any of my neighbors to call the cops on me.

[sevensix2x51]

Although it's legal to open carry my AR in my property I wouldn't dare do it to give any of my neighbors to call the cops on me.

sissy. you ned to get yourself into a conservative neighborhood! my neighbors give me a wave and a smile as i unload half my arsenal after a range trip!

(there is also either a 4x4 or a boat parked in 85% of lawns on any of the nearest 5 streets, fwiw. )

[cryoguy]

sissy. you ned to get yourself into a conservative neighborhood! my neighbors give me a wave and a smile as i unload half my arsenal after a range trip!

(there is also either a 4x4 or a boat parked in 85% of lawns on any of the nearest 5 streets, fwiw. )

Same here. All of my neighborhood is the same way. They are fine with me having guns.

[Vinz]

Wouldn't it be awesome to open carry an AR15...
I am not sure cause then everyone would, even the bad guys.


vinz

[JTROKS]

sissy. you ned to get yourself into a conservative neighborhood! my neighbors give me a wave and a smile as i unload half my arsenal after a range trip!

(there is also either a 4x4 or a boat parked in 85% of lawns on any of the nearest 5 streets, fwiw. )

Don't get me wrong. A couple of my neighbors who are peace officers know I have guns. I shoot with one of them, the other ask me for gun info or just shoot the breeze. The one I'm worried that will call the cops on me if I open carry my AR would be the one with the pitbull that I had problems with. Let's put it this way, when I was looking for a CNC shop and anodizing shop in the bay area to do a batch of CAL15-BS I was given the, "Sorry we don't do gun parts" BS. This area is so full of anti-gun liberals it's not even funny.

[Americal]

Wow, wtf really?? Psychological testing? So some third party can arbitrarily deny your right to protect yourself? Sounds EXACTLY like what happens in the big cities here now. Actually, road rage fights and bar fights are FIGHTS. Even drunks can tell the difference between a punch and killing someone. Criminals are criminals. Here in town we had a few bar fights where people died in the last year or two. No guns involved. It doesn't matter what the weapon is, people die both on purpose and by accident. YOU are the general public, do you realize that? Or did you mean everyone but you. The "general public" ALL OVER THE COUNTRY carries guns every day. Do you see a large number of random murders in states with shall issue CCW policies? It's pretty much shall issue up here in shasta county, I can't remember the last time someone got shot in a random crime. The blood isn't flowing in the streets, and thousands of people are carrying EVERY DAY in this small town.

Back to the OP, if you want to live in a 3rd world country where you need to carry a loaded rifle with you, go ahead. Enjoy living in the relative safety of the best country on earth, where your life isn't in danger every time you step outside. We can carry handguns here because the situations that may arise, even extremely rarely, will be small incidents. The places where people carry rifles around are at WAR. Always fighting, always dying, life expectancy in the mid 30s...

See right now you dont here about bar shooting because people arent willing to risk taking a firearm to a bar because it is illegal. If everyone was allowed to carry a firearm they would be in the right mind when they left their house with it, but when people begin to drink or do drugs their judgment is heavily impaired, many people are stabbed and hit with bottles. In these states who says they dont shoot somebody with many bi standards around. Im not doubting that your average person would never consider shooting somebody I worry about the ones that arent psychologically stable and extremely quick tempered. There are probably 100's of fights a day that no one hears about due to its not important. Given firearms this would change everything. You cant use Mount Shasta as an example because it is a small town with roughly over 3500 people their is a less likely chance of somebody having a mental issue and go shoot somebody. Lets say that 1 in a 100,000 people would have the mentality to shoot someone (which it could be much more common but im shooting high here to make a point). The whole Siskiyou County has only around 45,000 people their may be no problems with guns over there because by statistics you still may have everybody in the County be psychologically stable to carry guns. While if you look at LA County there are around 10,000,000 (thats 10 million people) so statistically thats 100 people who are crazy enough to take it that far and put firearms into the hands of those people in public theres no saying what could happen. You can say how it works in a small town when your trying to apply it to a whole state (and the largest state in the US by population) because small towns are completely different then the whole. Its like taking a survey of 1000 people from the same city and trying to implement that to the whole state. Because most everything regresses to the mean statistically. So you have to be careful on comparing other places to California because it is true there is no place like California. Just because something works in Tennessee or Texas that doesn't mean it would work here. Thats why in our government each state regulates its on laws according to each states circumstances.

I am not against our 2nd amendment rights, I am a strong believe in a free and safe USA. I am very for our 2nd amendment rights but you have to see when the 2nd amendment was written there where approximately 2.5 million Americans now thats less people living within the city limits of LA. The same rules cannot apply the same rules when there are 120x more people. The 2nd amendment was written to protect Americans, the 2nd talks mostly about a well regulated militia and the peoples right to keep and bear arms. When the US fought the Revolution militia men where used to protect each state if the military was unable to do so. Nowadays we have around 3 million military men and women (both active and reserves about 1.5 mil active and 1.5 mil reserves) there is no need for each state to have a regulated militia. The country is very different now then it was over 200 years ago. Our constitution was meant to be amended (thus the name Amendments) to be changed as necessary to the growing and changing country. Thats why we vote to be sure the rules change along with our country. Our Forefathers did not mean for the rules to be permanent or read and interpreted word for word. So California is doing what it thinks necessary for itself.

I am a strong believe in people keeping their guns, having ammo readily available(and cheap), and even increasing the availability of different firearms (making the list very long). As a future politician I respect our government and hope to make an impact myself. Thank you for your time.

[Nessal]

See right now you dont here about bar shooting because people arent willing to risk taking a firearm to a bar because it is illegal. If everyone was allowed to carry a firearm they would be in the right mind when they left their house with it, but when people begin to drink or do drugs their judgment is heavily impaired, many people are stabbed and hit with bottles. In these states who says they dont shoot somebody with many bi standards around. Im not doubting that your average person would never consider shooting somebody I worry about the ones that arent psychologically stable and extremely quick tempered. There are probably 100's of fights a day that no one hears about due to its not important. Given firearms this would change everything. You cant use Mount Shasta as an example because it is a small town with roughly over 3500 people their is a less likely chance of somebody having a mental issue and go shoot somebody. Lets say that 1 in a 100,000 people would have the mentality to shoot someone (which it could be much more common but im shooting high here to make a point). The whole Siskiyou County has only around 45,000 people their may be no problems with guns over there because by statistics you still may have everybody in the County be psychologically stable to carry guns. While if you look at LA County there are around 10,000,000 (thats 10 million people) so statistically thats 100 people who are crazy enough to take it that far and put firearms into the hands of those people in public theres no saying what could happen. You can say how it works in a small town when your trying to apply it to a whole state (and the largest state in the US by population) because small towns are completely different then the whole. Its like taking a survey of 1000 people from the same city and trying to implement that to the whole state. Because most everything regresses to the mean statistically. So you have to be careful on comparing other places to California because it is true there is no place like California. Just because something works in Tennessee or Texas that doesn't mean it would work here. Thats why in our government each state regulates its on laws according to each states circumstances.

I am not against our 2nd amendment rights, I am a strong believe in a free and safe USA. I am very for our 2nd amendment rights but you have to see when the 2nd amendment was written there where approximately 2.5 million Americans now thats less people living within the city limits of LA. The same rules cannot apply the same rules when there are 120x more people. The 2nd amendment was written to protect Americans, the 2nd talks mostly about a well regulated militia and the peoples right to keep and bear arms. When the US fought the Revolution militia men where used to protect each state if the military was unable to do so. Nowadays we have around 3 million military men and women (both active and reserves about 1.5 mil active and 1.5 mil reserves) there is no need for each state to have a regulated militia. The country is very different now then it was over 200 years ago. Our constitution was meant to be amended (thus the name Amendments) to be changed as necessary to the growing and changing country. Thats why we vote to be sure the rules change along with our country. Our Forefathers did not mean for the rules to be permanent or read and interpreted word for word. So California is doing what it thinks necessary for itself.

I am a strong believe in people keeping their guns, having ammo readily available(and cheap), and even increasing the availability of different firearms (making the list very long). As a future politician I respect our government and hope to make an impact myself. Thank you for your time.

Still haven't answered my question. On what basis can you tell if someone is a gang member?

[Nessal]

Oh, btw can you please also tell me what psychological test that you suggested that we should enforce before we are allowed to carry a gun.

[Americal]

Still haven't answered my question. On what basis can you tell if someone is a gang member?

Most gang members do not hide their gang affiliation. Whether it be clothing tattoos or other distinctions. Most anti-gang police officers know the gang members and could tell a gang member by looking at them.

But isnt this the scary thing you may not be able to identify the gang members. So you and your family could be walking right by a group of individuals without knowing they are gang members or not. If you look into the definition of a gang it could be any group of people which share a common interest or personality. I would be afraid of any group of people open carrying AR's. If I where walking down the street carrying an AR or a S&W 629 I would concede to a group of people carrying AR's. People claim that nobody would mess with someone with an AR, but you dont think what if there carrying also and there are more of them or they catch you off guard. The big thing is its most likely strapped to your back an AR strapped to your back is no better then an AR in your safe when it comes to defense somebody who wants to mug you simply comes behind you or up to you with a 9mm and your forced to concede or suffer the consequences.

[Americal]

Oh, btw can you please also tell me what psychological test that you suggested that we should enforce before we are allowed to carry a gun.

Not being a psychologist I do not know which would be proper to determine this. I know that the military has their own psychological test and many jobs make you pass a psychological test in order to work as well. All I can say is that I would exclude people with psychological disorders. I dont mean to offend anybody that suffers from a psychological disorder, but I think people who suffer from depression, schizophrenia, bipolar, etc. or even people who suffer from anger issues. Such as people who have been made to take anger management or people with known issues with alcohol. If some psychologist or psychiatrist could provide more insight on what they think a proper method could be or even who should be excluded. If we are to go toward a more lenient concealed carry society we have to understand that there has to be some boundaries to who we allow to carry. I do not wanna become a politician that claims to make law based on an area that I am not very knowledgeable in. I apologize for making it seem like I knew which psychological test were appropriate thats the job for the professionals.

[paratroop]

That's the same kind of liberal thinking that leads to more restrictive gun laws. How does freedom going up equals security going down? That makes no damn sense. Btw, as long as there are people, they will always do "bad" things. Either it be with guns, knives, bats, cars, whatever. Don't blame the tool, blame the individual.

liberal thinking? the only thing liberal about me is the amount of lead i put downrange defending the constitution of the united states from bad guys. let me explain my formula to you. more security= more laws, which restrict our freedoms. less security= fewer restrictions to our freedoms. 100% security is a prison where everyone is in solitary confinement. 100% freedom is now laws, no law men, is anarchy. get it? my original stance on here was to seperate the word felon and gangbanger. my new stance is i wish you would carry your ars around with you so i can point and laugh at your cool ncstar laser

[shark92651]

There are probably 100's of fights a day that no one hears about due to its not important. Given firearms this would change everything.

While if you look at LA County there are around 10,000,000 (thats 10 million people) so statistically thats 100 people who are crazy enough to take it that far and put firearms into the hands of those people in public theres no saying what could happen.

So California is doing what it thinks necessary for itself.

I am a strong believe in people keeping their guns, having ammo readily available(and cheap), and even increasing the availability of different firearms (making the list very long). As a future politician I respect our government and hope to make an impact myself. Thank you for your time.

Wow, so you believe the availability of guns leads to crime? You also think California needs to maintain a "list" of guns we can buy, and you are a future politician. Well based on all your arguments I have read in this thread it doesn't sound like your ideas about guns are very much different than all the current anti-gun politicians we currently have running this state. You will fit in quite nicely. Can I have your name please so I know to NEVER vote for you?

[civilsnake]

Most gang members do not hide their gang affiliation. Whether it be clothing tattoos or other distinctions. Most anti-gang police officers know the gang members and could tell a gang member by looking at them.

But isnt this the scary thing you may not be able to identify the gang members. So you and your family could be walking right by a group of individuals without knowing they are gang members or not. If you look into the definition of a gang it could be any group of people which share a common interest or personality. I would be afraid of any group of people open carrying AR's. If I where walking down the street carrying an AR or a S&W 629 I would concede to a group of people carrying AR's. People claim that nobody would mess with someone with an AR, but you dont think what if there carrying also and there are more of them or they catch you off guard. The big thing is its most likely strapped to your back an AR strapped to your back is no better then an AR in your safe when it comes to defense somebody who wants to mug you simply comes behind you or up to you with a 9mm and your forced to concede or suffer the consequences.

So you endorse profiling and come to a website dedicated to Second Amendment freedoms in California to tell us why we shouldn't be allowed to bear arms. If you want to be a politician you need to start making smarter choices.

To address your point: how many people would these "gang members" have to openly accost in a community before the equally armed community simply says "enough" and buries the problem in their backyards? You're not thinking big picture or long term. There will be a period of adjustment, just like with everything else.