If you’d paid attention at all, you’d know that the scenario you paint has not come to pass in the 40+ states that ALREADY have CC. The sky did not fall. It will not fall here, the Eagle’s hysteria notwithstanding.

The bet offer still stands – and still no takers. Folks, (and you know who you are, (Eagle among them), you know the truth, and still you spout hysteria.

Chicken.

The only insanity here is your own words.

If you have to cook meth, open the window.

We be packin, so if yo cut us off in traffic, we have justice now.

We be celebratin by doing some drinkin, so if yo piss us off, we be shootin.

If we see illegals, we will round em up, posse style. No ned for a trial, judge, or jury. We can make all decisions final!

What were our legislators thinking? Who voted to approve this insanity?

Once again, the name fits. These are questions for effect, not for substance, but I’ll play.

2nd question first. Presuming we’re talking about a legal, licensed concealed carry, ideally there wouldn’t be any bars on where to carry. You’ve hit a good point – If I’m trustworthy outside a magic line, why am I not trustworthy inside that magic line? I am, of course; the CC holder didn’t change. Those lines exist for political purposes, to make CC more palatable to the masses, not to accomplish anything substantive. Such a statute would be more stringent than the current one, as well.

As to the 1st – No, sorry. Not at this point. I can abide by the law, ya see, even if I disagree with it. It’s called being an adult.

Twilight Zone…….

Man, I need a new keyboard.

Or new fingers.

I didn’t find Pop’s post to be anything unusual.

I don’t like the trolls and wish that WE could/would do something about it.

A little strange.

Hey, GMC maybe we BOTH imagined it?

Cue the Twilight Zoe music….

I responded to a rather silly post of Popup!; as I posted it, I noted that Popup!’s post was gone. I’ve recycled and reopened the site, and it does not appear to be a computer problem, so, aside from making my response seem out of place, WHAT GIVES???!!!

The post was not obscene or threatening. While I disagree (it appears) with Popup! on this issue, IN NO WAY was removing his post justified.

It is your forum, and you can do what you want, I guess, but most of us here like it a free-for-all, with little interference. Even I, who routinely call for discretion and courtesy don’t want a big brother coming in and imposing rigid standards. That’s how blogs become stale and useless.

You are a free press. Are you not dedicated to the free exchange of ideas and information? If so, WHAT GIVES???!!!

Others? Thoughts? Anyone know what’s going on?

“to an opposition who’s intellectual magazines are empty on this issue.”

I think your last post confirmed that. Thanks.

_____(No gun graphic)=(I’m unarmed, please don’t hurt me graphic).

Please understand the results of your decision to bar legal concealed carry:1) The legal concealed carry holder, trained and with a proven track record of abiding by the law, and who represents no threat to your business, will respect your decision.2) The criminal, untrained and violating the law now, will not.3) The legal owner, to enter your establishment, is forced to leave his weapon unsecured in his vehicle, where it is more likely to be stolen and used in crime.Thus barring concealed carry does nothing to enhance the security of your establishment, and may well make it less safe.

Concealed carry holders tend to be better educated and higher income. They have a proven track record of abiding by the law; otherwise, they would not have the permit. Isn’t that exactly the clientele you want in your business? Given that reality, why do you bar those who present no threat, and welcome those who do?

I will respect your right to bar legal carry in your establishment. I will also take my business elsewhere, and will advise friends to do likewise. Just as you have the right to bar citizens who carry, I have the right to spend my dollars in business that respect my decision to take responsibility for my own safety.

_____

Feel free to borrow and use as you see fit. And be polite; we know we’re in the right in this one, and have no need to provide ammunition to an opposition who’s intellectual magazines are empty on this issue.

The old man looked up at the gunslinger and said,”No, I never did dance. I JUST NEVER WANTED TO.”

“A crowd had gathered by then and the gunslinger said, “Well you old fool, you’re gonna’ dance now,” and started shooting at the old man’s feet. The old prospector was hopping around and everybody was laughing.When the gunslinger fired his last bullet, he holstered his gun and turned around to go back into the saloon. The old man reached up on the mule, drew his shotgun, and pulled both hammers back making a double clicking sound.The gunslinger heard the sound and everything got quiet. The crowd watched as the gunslinger slowly turned around looking down both barrels of the shotgun.

The old man asked, “Did you ever kiss a mule square on the butt?”

The gunslinger swallowed hard and said,”NO, BUT I’VE ALWAYS WANTED TO!”

If you feel safer with a gun, go through the process and get your permit. This far left lunatic (as I have been described) really doesn’t care. I don’t want your gun and I really do not want to see them taken away from you.

I would ask one thing, however: if you are going to whip it out (your gun) in public, remember a line from a crappy old Lynrd Skynrd song:

“Give me three steps, mister, give me three steps towards the door.”

Then fire away.

In fact, the “wild west” was much less wild than you might imagine. According to historian Roger McGrath, who studied mining California mining towns, perhaps the “wildest” of the wild west, ordinary crime was quite rare. While there was a propensity for drunk young men to kill each other over perceived slights to their honor, other crime was not tolerated.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F06EFD91038F93AA3575AC0A962948260http://www.sandiegohistory.org/journal/85spring/br-gunfighters.htm

Roger D. McGrath, Gunfighters, Highwaymen, & Vigilantes: Violence on the Frontier (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984).

I’ve never seen such a study but I have heard of individual examples, in several different states, of businesses taking the signs down immediately after being robbed.

Often times a Conservative is a Liberal who got mugged.

First, this is another opinion injected by anti-gun Holman as though it’s creditable fact.

Maybe it’s because the other states have discovered that the leftist hype of bloody mayhem hasn’t come true and the signs aren’t needed.

Or maybe it’s because post-enactment studies in conceal carry states indicated businesses with the ban sign experienced an increase number of robberies so the businesses removed the sign. (I’m not aware of any such study but, hey, it “seems” right.)

Right next to those Gun Buster signs businesses should also put one of these.

DISARMED VICTIM ZONE!!

Honestly, I don’t understand the thought process, or lack of, that goes into putting one of those signs up. Is it blissfull ignorance?