# Why



## bigbulls (Mar 12, 2008)

Why can't we actually have a discussion about something that effects us all, like gun rights, with out resorting to calling each other idiots, dumb asses, etc... and getting the thread locked up?

When there's actually a thread with a serious topic that's actually worth talking about that could possibly effect every ones rights, instead of which tires to put on a truck, we have to act like little children.

I know darn good and well that none of you talk to people face to face the same way you talk to people here on PFF.

Is it really that hard to have a discussion and treat each other like adults?


----------



## TatSoul (Mar 12, 2012)

bigbulls said:


> Why can't we actually have a discussion about something that effects us all, like gun rights, with out resorting to calling each other idiots, dumb asses, etc... and getting the thread locked up?
> 
> When there's actually a thread with a serious topic that's actually worth talking about that could possibly effect every ones rights, instead of which tires to put on a truck, we have to act like little children.
> 
> ...


I enjoy watching the debates good points on both sides but i see where your coming from


----------



## milesvdustin (Jun 25, 2011)

I haven't said anything in that thread I wouldnt say to someones face. I actually haven't said anything underhanded at all there so I guess this post is pointless. Carry on all.


----------



## bigbulls (Mar 12, 2008)

I'm not talking about you or any one specifically and I wasn't referring to you in your first post, regarding acting like children, other than what I specifically quoted and asked of you. 

The entire tone of the thread is ridiculous. 

When a topic that's actually important comes up, manners and logic go right out the window. It would actuallybe nice to have a real topic to discuss instead of the same ole same ole stuff that gets rehashed over and over and over but it seems entirely impossible to do so.


----------



## Gravity3694 (May 10, 2011)

I dunno why, but I always get annoyed at how people fail to cite claimed statistics which occasionally don't exist. The FBI and those who academically study criminal justice (including me for the past 7 years) hate that. Its ridiculously easy to interpret a statistic or study anyway you want it. Furthermore, a one shot study doesn't indicate factual validity of the concept described. Nor does one simple change in policy result in a change in crime. For example, I don't believe that the relaxation of firearm laws is the express reason that crime has has been on the decrease as a whole since the 1970s. I would be more than willing to show where to find said studies so you can draw your own conclusions.


----------



## milesvdustin (Jun 25, 2011)

I firmly believe in open carry and ccw. We should have the right to carry whatever we want whenever we want. In every state! Obviously convicted felons and all the obvious restrictions for safety, but the states should not be able to limit our second amendment rights!! I just choose ccw as my personal choice.


----------



## shootnstarz (May 4, 2011)

I agree, and it's always the same handful that escalate the disscussion to uncivility.

Rick


----------



## Flounderpounder (Oct 3, 2007)

Yes, civility is lacking in far too many. This is not limited to firearms threads. Just look at the politics section!


----------



## kendive (Sep 9, 2008)

shootnstarz said:


> I agree, and it's always the same handful that escalate the disscussion to uncivility.
> 
> Rick


If it's the same people that are doing it then they should not be allowed on here.

Just Saying...


----------



## johnf (Jan 20, 2012)

milesvdustin said:


> I firmly believe in open carry and ccw. We should have the right to carry whatever we want whenever we want. In every state! Obviously convicted felons and all the obvious restrictions for safety, but the states should not be able to limit our second amendment rights!! I just choose ccw as my personal choice.


What about a college kid who gets 3 DWI's and has a felony when he's 22. Should that guy be stripped of his right to protect his family when he's 45 and living a productive life?


----------



## Perdido Duct Cleaning (Mar 13, 2012)

A felon is a felon.

No rights.

Bad choices= felony charge= no right to defend with gun


----------



## IM4MOPAR (Mar 10, 2011)

*how 'bout the UN treaty*

been gettin' alot of emails, more of the same Clinton-Global gun ban?


----------



## Grove (Jul 7, 2012)

Its all good.


----------



## kandv2000 (May 10, 2012)

1st 3 DUI's isnt a mistake it is a pattern of bad judgement. That is the exact person who should not carry a gun. However if he grows up and acts like an adult he can pettition the clemency board to have his gun rights restored. This is very common for minor felonys. Gun ownership although a right is also a privilege.


----------



## Grove (Jul 7, 2012)

+ 1 on the last post

people make mistakes, once you get a pass, twice you gotta pay the price

gun carry is a serious matter, I wish the training standards were harder so you dont have people carrying who just took the funshow class and dont know the real laws ect.


----------



## pierbound (Sep 1, 2008)

bigbulls said:


> Why can't we actually have a discussion about something that effects us all, like gun rights, with out resorting to calling each other idiots, dumb asses, etc... and getting the thread locked up?
> 
> When there's actually a thread with a serious topic that's actually worth talking about that could possibly effect every ones rights, instead of which tires to put on a truck, we have to act like little children.
> 
> ...



Sorry but I will, you have the same 3 that are good for that, DoneDeal2, scubapro, fisheye48, and there is a few others and they can't seem to have a conversation without insulting people for things they do or believe in, a couple of other threads were started relating to this topic and johnf started a poll and it wasn't long before scubapro chimed in especially after I posted picture's. I don't care what they say about how many people are there or what holster I'm wearing or what fish we're catching or what anyone say's negatively, we have the right to be out there and the fact is Florida Carry holds these meetings for our members and other second amendment advocates throughout the state. The meetings are informal and hosted by local volunteers who work to insure that it is a pleasant event. I am one of them volunteers who take's time out of my day to help run this. This was the beginning of these meetings in the panhandle after many members voiced their support to have some in the panhandle Florida Carry has over 22,000 members so it's no fly by night group. Many participants Open Carry and fish during these monthly informal events. Other participants carry concealed and may or may not fish at the meetings but the fact is ever since I posted the first thread on this subject I and what these meetings try to do have come under attack by the same people that benefit from what Florida Carry has done for them as far as their gun rights, I've been a CCW holder for 12 yrs. and up till about 1 year ago I was just like the majority of the people on PCFF I benefited from someone else doing the work so I decided I wanted to get more involved by giving back and helping out instead of taking and I'm not be as up to date on a lot of thing's like some people but I am learning not just listening but I'm out there in front listening to the "BS" from others, I said a few things maybe I shouldn't have but to have some of the inconsiderate comment's that has been thrown at us is inexcusable because we believe that lawful gun owners should have the choice to wear their firearm anyway they so choose whether is CC,OC or NO carry and wear it where they want "We are not Criminals" I don't Bash other folks posts and if you don't agree with what FC does don't comment and just stay out of the treads.


----------



## Splittine (Nov 24, 2007)

johnf said:


> What about a college kid who gets 3 DWI's and has a felony when he's 22. Should that guy be stripped of his right to protect his family when he's 45 and living a productive life?


 
YES. He wasnt worried about all the families he put in jepardy when driving intoxicated enough to be charged with a DUI not once but 3 times.


----------



## scubapro (Nov 27, 2010)

Pierbound,

That 1911 in your avatar -- carried in a nice Matt Delfatti rig would certainly be an improvement over the Taurus in the ill-fitting Serpa, with an associated gain in respect from armed citizens!:thumbsup:

I simply disagreed with the need for OC in public - you started with the insults (go back and read your posts). Then, it was "game on" - and through your own photographic evidence I was able to illustrate that you are the very type of *"squirrel"* that doesn't need to be open carrying a firearm in public... You brought it on yourself -- so don't cry "victim" now.


----------



## pierbound (Sep 1, 2008)

scubapro said:


> Pierbound,
> 
> That 1911 in your avatar -- carried in a nice Matt Delfatti rig would certainly be an improvement over the Taurus in the ill-fitting Serpa, with an associated gain in respect from armed citizens!:thumbsup:
> 
> I simply disagreed with the need for OC in public - you started with the insults (go back and read your posts). Then, it was "game on" - and through your own photographic evidence I was able to illustrate that you are the very type of *"squirrel"* that doesn't need to be open carrying a firearm in public... You brought it on yourself -- so don't cry "victim" now.


I wondered how long it would take you bill,


----------



## pierbound (Sep 1, 2008)

scubapro said:


> Pierbound,
> 
> That 1911 in your avatar -- carried in a nice Matt Delfatti rig would certainly be an improvement over the Taurus in the ill-fitting Serpa, with an associated gain in respect from armed citizens!:thumbsup:
> 
> I simply disagreed with the need for OC in public - you started with the insults (go back and read your posts). Then, it was "game on" - and through your own photographic evidence I was able to illustrate that you are the very type of *"squirrel"* that doesn't need to be open carrying a firearm in public... You brought it on yourself -- so don't cry "victim" now.



Listen this is the page on the other thread " http://www.pensacolafishingforum.com/f74/navarre-pier-open-carry-fishing-124247/index11/ " after I had been having a conversation fisheye48 started with his BS "probably not...to busy measuring pecker size with who had the biggest/coolest gun" then DoneDeal2 with "Yep your right I'm an LEO. Your not changing my mind. The whole group look like a bunch of clowns walking around a pier with some wearing thigh holsters and shoulder holsters. You guys should have dressed like Miami Vice it would have been fitting. If only there was a perfect state where the normal folks could move to get away from dumbasses like I saw in your pics." now go read the last post before it was closed out and you followed me the the other one, here's the link http://www.pensacolafishingforum.com/f74/navarre-pier-open-carry-fishing-124247/index15/ and this is all you have to do I understand makes ya feel good don't it?


----------



## scubapro (Nov 27, 2010)

I still don't see where I insulted you...:no:


----------



## pierbound (Sep 1, 2008)

scubapro said:


> I still don't see where I insulted you...:no:


that's right and you don't see anyplace I insulted you, and if you call this quote an insult I feel for you, QUOTE from me, 
There is a 99-100% chance of not being a victim, and why do you insist on believing that because we're on the pier with some OC and some CC that all we want to do is OC, that mindset is all wrong, you are misinformed and uneducated in what the 2nd amendment gives us and stands for and self defense as a whole , and attention is what people like you and your mindset give us and information to the public about what gun rights the government wants to take or has taken from us and it's up to us to work on getting our rights back, look we have fishermen on the pier that were jumping up and down and screaming "That's not right" because summerwind condo's wanted to ban shark fishing on the pier because a few tourists seen a tiger shark dragged on to the beach and killed. sharks on the pier are more dangerous then people with handguns OC or CC and I've seen the way tourists flock to see a shark landed on the pier and they get way to close when they're thrashing around but that's different for me to send my e-mails like I did and go to the County Commissioners meeting like I did and sign the petition like I did in opposition of this ban that they wanted to put on us "but that's different"
http://www.floridacarry.org/


----------



## scubapro (Nov 27, 2010)

Oh, I could have sworn I read you named me and said that I had insulted you...


----------



## pierbound (Sep 1, 2008)

Look if all you guy's are gonna do is pound OC,and CC just don't even post


----------



## scubapro (Nov 27, 2010)

I thought the purpose was for discussion - pro & con. If you only want to hear from those who support your position - why bother?

I fully support concealed carry by law abiding citizens. However, I see no reason to open carry in public - around the masses...

It scares some, draws unnecessary attention, places you at possible increased risk, gives gun owners in general a bad rap, and actually can create problems for - and become a burden to the wearer.

For example, carrying properly concealed - I am free to go anywhere I want that the law allows (even places with no firearms allowed signs). Open carry will result in many places preventing your entry - or requesting that you leave unless you disarm.

Try open carrying to one of the theme parks - you'll not even make it out of the parking lot before you're asked to disarm or leave. Carry concealed (effectively) - and you can make it through the higher caliber security at Animal Kingdom (where they are trained to spot & confront citizens who are packing).


----------



## Downtime2 (Sep 27, 2007)

pierbound, honest question. Do or have you noticed that the VAST majority disagree with you? You come across like a street preacher yelling at cars from a corner crossed with a 5 year old kid that doesen't get his way arguing back. Gotten plenty of alerts on you and your crap. You refuse to listen to ANYONE that doesn't 100% totally agree with you. Even moderate opinions, you pounce on them with your "stats". The open carry on the pier got ya'll your way. 95% who saw all 6 or so of ya'll honestly think you are nut cases. Boy, that really is gonna help your cause, right? But anyone that doesn't share your EXACT opinion is "anti-gun". I'm not anti gun, I'm anti-you and your holier than thou attitude.


----------



## TatSoul (Mar 12, 2012)

kandv2000 said:


> 1st 3 DUI's isnt a mistake it is a pattern of bad judgement. That is the exact person who should not carry a gun. However if he grows up and acts like an adult he can pettition the clemency board to have his gun rights restored. This is very common for minor felonys. Gun ownership although a right is also a privilege.


could you please refer to the part of the US constitution that has this rule written in there.No buts or ifs please quote our US constitution where this is stated.Including the part where the people who died and gave there lives to make this country what it is were felons.George Washington was guilty of multiple felonys so please refer to the part that prohibits people from owning guns that committed crimes.Because we all know felons are grouped into the same category,A felony could be someone who accidentally wrote a bogus check and was charged.Really anyone could be a felon since most felons never got caught.So without making your opinion of the matter a law give me one part of the constitution that says "every american has the right to bear arms unless"
Now use your same thinking and one day EVERYONE WILL LOSE THERE RIGHTS because we the people have let big government manipulate and molest the constitution.Eventually there will be a 20 questionaire and so forth to bear arms and than if your father was abusive you will lose your gun rights.Its a huge pandoras box thats been opened and it will only get worse till big government has all the guns and were left with nothing.


----------



## PompNewbie (Oct 1, 2007)

I have tried to refrain from commenting on this topic so far.. but here goes.
I have my CCW , and have lived where OC was legal (and i have carried that way on rare occasions). Sucba is a extremely knowledgeable person when it comes to firearms, and tactics. I have to agree that for general use CCW is far better then OC (see obvious benefits he posted earlier) however there are times when OC is beneficial such as hunting, camping, or hiking in the wilderness.
The point he is trying to make is that if your going to be the "spokesman" of said movement, then you might want to look presentable doing it.
Seeing a "spokesman" with a 1911 riding in a milt sparks rig high and tight to the body will garner a whole lot more respect then a single action revolver with a 8" barrel riding a uncle mikes holster just case you can.. 
To clarify my position here I am for "our rights" as given by the 2nd amendment without neutering by the mish mouth political leaders, who just want us to be quiet and sit down as they take those rights away.
I applaud the purpose of your group in bringing awareness to the masses, just make sure your message is a positive one.
Be professional and educated (other then spouting statistics) and look the part.
Sorry for the ramble..
Mike


----------



## titan77 (May 13, 2012)

if its legal carry it the way you want i just like mine concealed my opinion but do what yall want im here for support if its legal


----------



## Tyee Dave (Oct 24, 2007)

Bottom line is that the internet is a very poor medium to rally or make a point. Either you are singing to the choir or you are chumming for trolls. Everyone needs to take a break now and again, AND walk away, sleep on it, think about it rationally overnight and then re-engage. As I sit here, I am watching the undoing of what used to be a noble country because the people who normally agree, are now fighting amongst themselves.


----------



## pierbound (Sep 1, 2008)

scubapro said:


> I thought the purpose was for discussion - pro & con. If you only want to hear from those who support your position - why bother?
> 
> I fully support concealed carry by law abiding citizens. However, I see no reason to open carry in public - around the masses...
> 
> ...



But don't you think it should be the gun owners decision? I never said everyone should OC and are you saying that 44 states that have OC including OK that just passed it this year are wrong for allowing their citizens the right to CC or OC if they so choose, "No Firearm Signs" are for lawful people not criminals, if you OC and they want you to disarm or leave you just take your business elsewhere, many private business have changed their policy because of the issue of losing business from lawful gun owners, Many people have the perception that open carry will be viewed with fear by the non gun owning community,with the 43 states prior to OK studies find that those who come from OC states typically are not bothered by open carry. Most people don't even notice. The ones that do simply don't seem to care. As far as the claim it will make you more of a target or ‘the first one shot’ when a robber walks into the 7-11, despite the absolute lack of credible evidence that this has ever happened. If the robber walks in and sees that you’re armed, his whole plan has encountered an unexpected variable. In bank robberies where he might expect to see an armed guard he will have already factored that possibility into his plan, but only for the armed guard, not for open or concealed carry citizens. No robber robs a bank without at least a rudimentary plan. Nevertheless, being present for a bank robbery is an extremely remote possibility for most of us regardless of our preferred method of handgun carry, so let’s go back in the 7-11. If the robber sees someone is armed he is forced to either significantly alter the plan or abort it outright. Robbing is an inherently apprehensive occupation, and one that doesn’t respond well to instant modifications. He is not prepared to commit murder when he only planned for larceny. He knows that a petty robbery will not garner the intense police manhunt a murder would. He doesn’t know if you’re an armed citizen or a police officer and isn’t going to take the time to figure it out. Either way, if someone in the 7-11 is unexpectedly armed, how many others might be similarly adorned and where might they be? Does this unexpectedly armed individual have a partner who is likewise armed nearby, someone who is watching right now? Self preservation compels him to abort the plan for one that is less risky. So we see that the logic matches the history; open carriers are not the first ones shot because it doesn’t make sense in any common street crime scenario that they would be. If your personal self protection plan emphasizes “Hollywood” style crimes over the more realistic street mugging, it might be best to stay home.


----------



## Outside9 (Apr 30, 2008)

You guys need to meet somewhere, get drunk, get into a fight, drink some more and then start hunging on each other and saying how sorry you are and "I love you man".


----------



## MikeG (Oct 5, 2007)

pierbound said:


> But don't you think it should be the gun owners decision? I never said everyone should OC and are you saying that 44 states that have OC including OK that just passed it this year are wrong for allowing their citizens the right to CC or OC if they so choose, "No Firearm Signs" are for lawful people not criminals, if you OC and they want you to disarm or leave you just take your business elsewhere, many private business have changed their policy because of the issue of losing business from lawful gun owners, Many people have the perception that open carry will be viewed with fear by the non gun owning community,with the 43 states prior to OK studies find that those who come from OC states typically are not bothered by open carry. Most people don't even notice. The ones that do simply don't seem to care. As far as the claim it will make you more of a target or ‘the first one shot’ when a robber walks into the 7-11, despite the absolute lack of credible evidence that this has ever happened. If the robber walks in and sees that you’re armed, his whole plan has encountered an unexpected variable. In bank robberies where he might expect to see an armed guard he will have already factored that possibility into his plan, but only for the armed guard, not for open or concealed carry citizens. No robber robs a bank without at least a rudimentary plan. Nevertheless, being present for a bank robbery is an extremely remote possibility for most of us regardless of our preferred method of handgun carry, so let’s go back in the 7-11. If the robber sees someone is armed he is forced to either significantly alter the plan or abort it outright. Robbing is an inherently apprehensive occupation, and one that doesn’t respond well to instant modifications. He is not prepared to commit murder when he only planned for larceny. He knows that a petty robbery will not garner the intense police manhunt a murder would. He doesn’t know if you’re an armed citizen or a police officer and isn’t going to take the time to figure it out. Either way, if someone in the 7-11 is unexpectedly armed, how many others might be similarly adorned and where might they be? Does this unexpectedly armed individual have a partner who is likewise armed nearby, someone who is watching right now? Self preservation compels him to abort the plan for one that is less risky. So we see that the logic matches the history; open carriers are not the first ones shot because it doesn’t make sense in any common street crime scenario that they would be. If your personal self protection plan emphasizes “Hollywood” style crimes over the more realistic street mugging, it might be best to stay home.


Where did you gather this Robbery info, if you don't mind me asking?


----------



## K-Bill (May 14, 2009)

TatSoul said:


> could you please refer to the part of the US constitution that has this rule written in there.No buts or ifs please quote our US constitution where this is stated.Including the part where the people who died and gave there lives to make this country what it is were felons.George Washington was guilty of multiple felonys so please refer to the part that prohibits people from owning guns that committed crimes.Because we all know felons are grouped into the same category,A felony could be someone who accidentally wrote a bogus check and was charged.Really anyone could be a felon since most felons never got caught.So without making your opinion of the matter a law give me one part of the constitution that says "every american has the right to bear arms unless"
> Now use your same thinking and one day EVERYONE WILL LOSE THERE RIGHTS because we the people have let big government manipulate and molest the constitution.Eventually there will be a 20 questionaire and so fo
> rth to bear arms and than if your father was abusive you will lose your gun rights.Its a huge pandoras box thats been opened and it will only get worse till big government has all the guns and were left with nothing.


WHAT?!? Does this actually make sense to you when you go back and read it?? Did you really bring George Washington into a conversation about today's concealed carry laws? Are you really making an argument that known convicted felons should have gun rights? The guy you responded to just said mild felons can have their rights restored by a board.


----------

