Open carry in an urban setting, when you have some realistic alternative available (such as concealed carry), is rather like a homosexual "kiss-in." [More]
Wow! This is terrible for shotgun news. This article is wrong on so many levels, it boggles my mind. I could literally write a 10 page essay on why this is bullshit. Sarah Brady could have written this.
My take on Crammers meaning is that gun owners are doing some thing shameful by exercising their rights. Why doesn’t he go on the Brady Campaigns payroll? It would be more honest. Prags make me puke.
Yeah, sure, the way to solve our problems is to not speak plainly. This guy must love the "don't ask, don't tell" policy as this idea is no different.
It will be interesting to see how it pans out. Seems to me, at least, that a lot of people are ready to abandon the "pretty please" appeasement approach altogether.
Why can't people get the fact that the 2nd Amendment isn't there so that the people can effect change through force of arms. It is there so that the people do not have to.
"I'm talking about the situations where open carry is considered disturbing, you have the option of having your gun concealed, and you choose to carry openly."
the question really is: who says this is considered disturbing?
i say the jury is still out on that. i say the analogy makes no sense until you show me that, first.
unless you're showing me this from day one. "open carry: so disturbing."
"Why can't people get the fact that the 2nd Amendment isn't there so that the people can effect change through force of arms. It is there so that the people do not have to."
Dang, now why can't I say things like that so compactly?
The quoted bit of Cramer's article strikes me as being a rather strong arguement in favor of open carry. Really, why would anyone want bigoted filth as friends?
Here's an idea--maybe the Pink Pistols should have a "kiss-in" while open carrying somewhere. That way they could double the number of scumbags getting aneurysms!
The first time I read this, it bugged me.
ReplyDeleteI read it again later, thinking maybe I was taking it wrong. Still bugged me.
I read it once more.
Then I cancelled my SGN subscription and told them why.
With friends like this, who needs the Bradys?
Yep, me too.
ReplyDeleteI told SNG that I would renew when they fired this Disgeraceful Pragmatist Compromiser.
Wow! This is terrible for shotgun news. This article is wrong on so many levels, it boggles my mind. I could literally write a 10 page essay on why this is bullshit. Sarah Brady could have written this.
ReplyDeleteMy take on Crammers meaning is that gun owners are doing some thing shameful by exercising their rights. Why doesn’t he go on the Brady Campaigns payroll? It would be more honest. Prags make me puke.
ReplyDeleteYeah, sure, the way to solve our problems is to not speak plainly. This guy must love the "don't ask, don't tell" policy as this idea is no different.
ReplyDeleteIt will be interesting to see how it pans out. Seems to me, at least, that a lot of people are ready to abandon the "pretty please" appeasement approach altogether.
Why can't people get the fact that the 2nd Amendment isn't there so that the people can effect change through force of arms. It is there so that the people do not have to.
ReplyDeleteI've been getting SGN subscription renewal offers in the mail.
ReplyDeleteI won't be renewing and I intend to let them know why.
Ready on the left? ready on the right? All ready on the firing line? FIRE!
ReplyDeleteSHOTGUN NEWS
No. 2 News Plaza,
Second Floor
Peoria, IL 61614
SGNews@imoutdoors.com
he sums it up right here:
ReplyDelete"I'm talking about the situations where open carry is considered disturbing, you have the option of having your gun concealed, and you choose to carry openly."
the question really is: who says this is considered disturbing?
i say the jury is still out on that. i say the analogy makes no sense until you show me that, first.
unless you're showing me this from day one. "open carry: so disturbing."
"Why can't people get the fact that the 2nd Amendment isn't there so that the people can effect change through force of arms. It is there so that the people do not have to."
ReplyDeleteDang, now why can't I say things like that so compactly?
Very nicely put, Gregg.
The quoted bit of Cramer's article strikes me as being a rather strong arguement in favor of open carry. Really, why would anyone want bigoted filth as friends?
ReplyDeleteHere's an idea--maybe the Pink Pistols should have a "kiss-in" while open carrying somewhere. That way they could double the number of scumbags getting aneurysms!
Whoa, there, folks. Before we all start trashing SGN, take a look at this column by Vin Suprynowicz, which appears in the October 10th issue.
ReplyDeleteMe, I just renewed my subscription.