Carried illegally last night.

[1032JBT]

Id rep if I could. I honestly dont see what the big deal is. Yeah I broke the law, everybody breaks the law, its a fact of life. Ever gone over 1 mph over the speed limit? You broke the law.

I may have technically done something "illegal", but what is the big deal? Who did it affect besides me when I chose to carry a gun without an OH license? Absolutely nobody, so why is it a big deal?

I bet most of you listen to some music artist who "brags" about using drugs or doing something that is technically illegal.

The big deal is the other laws you keep describing are INFRACTIONS.......the one you broke in Indiana would be a class A Midemeanor. The difference: One will get you a ticket the other will end up with you in jail.

It's your life, do with it what you want but don't go posting about it on a website viewable to anyone that wants to see it. And if you do choose to post about further criminal activity then don't be so surprised when RESPONSIBLE gunowners don't support you.

 

[abrewer15]

I dont care what other people think. Many people on here open carry which scares the sheeple, but they do it anyway. Other then the legality of it, how is that any different?

You go on worrying about how other people think of you, have fun with that.

You are missing the point man. It isn't so much that we are so worried about what every Tom, Dick, and Harry think about us. It is deeper than that. As long as people look at gun owners as violent, law breaking, and/or untrustworthy people the struggle for us to continue FREELY AND LEGALLY exercising our right to own and possess firearms will continue and only grow stronger. It isn't so much that we are disagreeing with you on the grounds that you think you were justified...the problem we have is that you publicly are proving the many misguided gun haters right. They think that all gun owners are reckless and have no regard for the law. The next time you decide to do it, just don't be so arrogant about it. Believe it or not stereotypes typically form from some basis of truth. In this case the idea that gunowners will do what they want when they want regardless of the law has been proven true. Even just one persons actions, no matter how unintentional or victimless it may be, is enough to fuel all the fire that the people who want to take away our freedom of gun ownership.

If and apparently when you may choose to make the same decision, go ahead and do it. You will have to suffer the consequences if you are caught, however, please for the sake of all law abiding gun owners...don't announce it to the world (even though this is a gun owners forum). Not only for the benefit of you but us as well, because believe it or not those that are against the 2nd amendment are on sites like these just as much as we are to hold threads like this against us.

 

[thebishopp]

Id rep if I could. I honestly dont see what the big deal is. Yeah I broke the law, everybody breaks the law, its a fact of life. Ever gone over 1 mph over the speed limit? You broke the law.

I may have technically done something "illegal", but what is the big deal? Who did it affect besides me when I chose to carry a gun without an OH license? Absolutely nobody, so why is it a big deal?

I bet most of you listen to some music artist who "brags" about using drugs or doing something that is technically illegal.

Thank you.

While I do agree that it can be unwise to "brag" about breaking the law on a public forum, it could also be seen as a way of letting others know you were willing to take the risk of breaking an unconstitutional law in order to protect yourself.

Of course I also think it was "unwise" of our founding fathers and their supporters to stand up against the British. They didn't just wake up one morning and were suddenly at war. They took a lot of risk, their very lives as well as the lives and welfare of their families. Their actions were not "wise". Wise men would have have submitted to British authority, curried favor with the government so that more restrictive laws wouldn't be passed.

I do, however, thank the creator (however you may call him/her/it) that they were "unwise" in that fashion.

The problem as I see it isn't that you broke the law in OH, it's that that the law shouldn't even exist in the first place.

There are some here that talk about being afraid your actions could result in further restriction of our 2nd Amendment protected right.

Really? I mean REALLY? I think people really really really need to ponder the thinking behind those type of statements. Despite all the statistics about "responsible gun ownership" the government is attempting to institute ever more restrictive laws. Do you really think it matters how "responsible" you wish to appear? How low you prostrate yourself in trying to meet the government's mandates? Do you really think it matters?

"Don't resist! Maybe the criminal will let us live!".

"Oh no, let's not break the law that should not be a law so that they don't make more laws that under the "laws" and founding principles of our country shouldn't even be laws".... The irony being that such laws, being unconstitutional are examples where it is our government which is breaking the law.

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first."-Jefferson

Now because of the huge risk involved in breaking these unconstitutional laws, I can not advocate to someone to take a stance which is, imo, something our founding fathers probably would have done. I will NOT, however, berate him for it.

To do so can be no greater hypocrisy for someone who claims to be a true supporter of the Constitution and the founding documents (the Declaration of Independence) of this country.

Now if you are not such a supporter then stand against all you wish (though personally I think this would be a clear case of treason - for standing against the very foundation of our country is as sure an act of war as any invading enemy).

I believe actions taken in defense of our Constitutional protected rights takes a great deal of courage because of the risk involved. Without risk there can not be achievement.

"When wrongs are pressed because it is believed they will be borne, resistance becomes morality. - Jefferson.

"There are risks and costs to a program of action. But they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable inaction."
John F. Kennedy

Jefferson (just a few, he has so many):

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.

The constitutions of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves;
that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property and freedom
of the press.

A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.

What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

Oh and for those that think the 2nd Amendment applies only to a state run militia:

”Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state. - Jefferson.

And Madison the author of the BoR:

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244)

"the ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone," (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper #46.)

 

[kickbacked]

I dont care what other people think. Many people on here open carry which scares the sheeple, but they do it anyway. Other then the legality of it, how is that any different?

You go on worrying about how other people think of you, have fun with that.

other than the legality of it? thats a huge thing. one is illegal and one isnt. And i dont care what people think of me. Our gun rights are already being taken away, its people like you who fuel the fire for the anti gun community. Heres an idea if you think you are so in the right, go to a gun store and tell them you illegally carry a gun into ohio because you dont care for stupid laws. see if they sell you anything.

 

[abrewer15]

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first."-Jefferson

Now because of the huge risk involved in breaking these unconstitutional laws, I can not advocate to someone to take a stance which is, imo, something our founding fathers probably would have done. I will NOT, however, berate him for it.

To do so can be no greater hypocrisy for someone who claims to be a true supporter of the Constitution and the founding documents (the Declaration of Independence) of this country.

Now if you are not such a supporter then stand against all you wish (though personally I think this would be a clear case of treason - for standing against the very foundation of our country is as sure an act of war as any invading enemy).

I believe actions taken in defense of our Constitutional protected rights takes a great deal of courage because of the risk involved. Without risk there can not be achievement.

"When wrongs are pressed because it is believed they will be borne, resistance becomes morality. - Jefferson.

"There are risks and costs to a program of action. But they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable inaction."
John F. Kennedy

Jefferson (just a few, he has so many):

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.

The constitutions of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves;
that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property and freedom
of the press.

A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.

What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

Oh and for those that think the 2nd Amendment applies only to a state run militia:

”Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state. - Jefferson.

And Madison the author of the BoR:

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244)

"the ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone," (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper #46.)

The biggest flaw with your response is that people are now thinking they should be able to interpret the bill of rights, constitution, or any other form of government writing how they see fit. Even though it is in black in white, it is still in risk of being obliterated on a daily basis.

 

[Awful Waffle]

other than the legality of it? thats a huge thing. one is illegal and one isnt. And i dont care what people think of me. Our gun rights are already being taken away, its people like you who fuel the fire for the anti gun community. Heres an idea if you think you are so in the right, go to a gun store and tell them you illegally carry a gun into ohio because you dont care for stupid laws. see if they sell you anything.

Obviously you care a whole lot about what the sheep think if you are willing to give up your second amendment rights just to please them.

 

[thebishopp]

The biggest flaw with your response is that people are now thinking they should be able to interpret the bill of rights, constitution, or any other form of government writing how they see fit. Even though it is in black in white, it is still in risk of being obliterated on a daily basis.

I'm not quite sure how that is a flaw in my response.

That is supposed to be one of the "just" purposes of the government.

Jefferson:

The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.

No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.


----

Laws to prevent murder, theft, rape, etc. are examples of just government. Laws which restrict the rights of the people are not.

 

[abrewer15]

I'm not quite sure how that is a flaw in my response.

The flaw is this...just because that what is supposed to be done...it isn't happening and each day more and more is taken away from us. Yes, we were supposed to have those rights...but sadly what is written on paper is holding less and less weight with government of today.

 

[thebishopp]

The flaw is this...just because that what is supposed to be done...it isn't happening and each day more and more is taken away from us. Yes, we were supposed to have those rights...but sadly what is written on paper is holding less and less weight with government of today.

Ah, I think I see what you are saying. But isn't that our own fault? All of us really? In all actuality we've trained them. It's like how we train our kids today that there is no consequence for their actions, there is no consequence for the actions of our politicians. Heck they vote raises for themselves while at the same time talking about how we need to "tighten our belts" and cut pay and funding for soldiers, teachers, police, any and all other public employees OTHER than themselves. They are still in office. No consequences.

 

[abrewer15]

Ah, I think I see what you are saying. But isn't that our own fault? All of us really?

Yes and no. By us following the law I don't necessarily see it as bowing down and giving up our rights. We have to stand up for what we believe in, however, there are right and wrong ways to do it IMO. Blatantly showing no regard for the law and then boasting about it, not so much. Writing our congressman, picketing, forming and supporting coalitions, raising awareness, and above all else proving those that hate us because we love guns wrong are the best and most effective ways to go about it.

 

[thebishopp]

Yes and no. By us following the law I don't necessarily see it as bowing down and giving up our rights. We have to stand up for what we believe in, however, there are right and wrong ways to do it IMO. Blatantly showing no regard for the law and then boasting about it, not so much. Writing our congressman, picketing, forming and supporting coalitions, raising awareness, and above all else proving those that hate us because we love guns wrong are the best and most effective ways to go about it.

I added a bit to my last while you were replying.

The fact is that all of that is not doing anything. The laws are still being passed. Heck there is even another thread about Obama trying to bypass congress on gun control.

There is an old Iroquois story that goes like this:

"Red Jacket and Joseph Ellicott, the agent for the Holland Land Company. The two are supposed to have been sitting on a log.
"Move over, Joe," Red Jacket is said to have remarked in the midst of their conversation. Ellicott obligingly complied.
This incident was repeated several times until Ellicott finally protested, "If I move over any more, I'll be entirely off the end of the log."
"Just so white man with Indian and his land," retorted Red Jacket."

Only in this case it is: "just so with government and the rights of the people".

Personally I don't even think armed resistance would work anymore because there are just not enough people who would make the sacrifice. It is a battle that is already lost no matter how much we slow it's inevitable outcome. As such I will commend anyone willing to take the risk to make that stand. Even more so when they are fighting a battle on principle, knowing that in all likelihood they will lose, be branded as "irresponsible", pariahs, ridiculed, and even demonized. Sometimes that is what defines a persons character and what they truly believe.

"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at a time of challenge and controversy. The true neighbor will risk his position and even his life for the welfare of others." - M. King.

But as to our overall chances, we are simply just too far down on the log at this point.

Oh, M-King had another quote that I find both interesting and somewhat sad.

“In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”

 

[thebishopp]

Yes and no. By us following the law I don't necessarily see it as bowing down and giving up our rights. We have to stand up for what we believe in, however, there are right and wrong ways to do it IMO. Blatantly showing no regard for the law and then boasting about it, not so much. Writing our congressman, picketing, forming and supporting coalitions, raising awareness, and above all else proving those that hate us because we love guns wrong are the best and most effective ways to go about it.

I will propose another thought.

Let's look at the poem by Martin Niemöller:


When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.


------

The fact is, sadly, that it would not have mattered if he had "spoken" out from any point of time other than at the very beginning and if that, only if he had the support of many. Many who were willing to make the necessary sacrifices such resistance would be sure to demand. Once the laws had been past and the very first arrests were being made without a unified resistance it was over.

By then gun control had been instituted and anyone who did not agree with the new government was punished.

The people who thought to go along with the governments ever stricter laws in order to avoid either more restrictive laws, or to avoid being punished... well you see where that got them.

In the end the outcome was unavoidable.

The problem for us, is there will be no "us" to come save "us".

As far as if it is or is not "bowing down". Well there are a few old sayings "Action through inaction" - "all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing".

Then again it can't be all bad. This new future. Most of us may never see it in our time (if we are lucky), but it will be the legacy we hand down to our descendants.

If it does happen in my lifetime, maybe the government will pay all our bills and give us free cheese. That's a plus :-)

 

[U.S. Patriot]

Just because you follow a law does not make you a sheep. There is a place and time to make a stand. One person will never change anything. It takes a group of like minded individuals to make change. We, as individuals can voice our opinions and ideals. In the end though, it's going to take the masses to defend what's left. One person carrying Illegally in another State is not going to do anything. If you where to be caught. They would probably make an example of you, and that would be the end. A wise Man picks his battles, not throw himself into a snake pit.

 

[lashicoN]

why would he get banned? The guy broke the law and then bragged about it, if anyone should get banned its him and his supporters. it must look great for a gun site when their members are supporting a guy with no respect for the law.

I have respect for the law. The real law, anyway. Not these new laws that make criminals out of everyone who follows what our supreme law (Our Constitution) says. You have the right to keep and bear arms, and that right shall not be infringed by our government. Our current state and Federal governments are the ones who have no respect for the law.

The sheeple do not like gun owners...You are not painting gun owners in good light...all you are doing is helping anti gun peoples ideas that we are law breakers

It doesn't matter. Gun owners, as a group, have never done anything to make the sheeple not like us. They still don't. We've never done anything, as a group, for them to paint us in a bad light, but they still do. We haven't given the anti-freedom movement any ammunition, and yet they make up lies about being able to purchase machine guns at gun shows without ID or a background check. We are dealing with irrational, ignorant, liars. You don't win freedoms from those kinds of people by being the nice guy who doesn't complain or exercise their freedoms whenever they choose. They aren't going to grant you any freedoms. You were born with those freedoms, it's up to you to exercise them yourself. Or don't, it doesn't matter to me.

One person will never change anything.

Exactly, which is why I don't understand the 40 pages of condemnation for this guy. He isn't going to make us look bad, or change anyone's already existing beliefs, simply by taking a tool from Indiana into Ohio.

 

[UncleMike]

Exactly, which is why I don't understand the 40 pages of condemnation for this guy. He isn't going to make us look bad, or change anyone's already existing beliefs, simply by taking a tool from Indiana into Ohio.

Posts like his have been, and will be, cited in Court, and before various Legislative body's, as examples of the "lawless" mentality of gun owners.
NEVER forget that people are watching this, and every other site with the words GUN, Shooter, Firearms, or any other reference to shooting sports, in it's URL, with the avowed purpose of gathering "evidence" that we cannot be trusted to obey the laws.
Posts like the OP's are exactly what those people are looking for and he conveniently gave them more ammunition to use against us.
After reading his additional responses I'm beginning to believe that doing exactly that was his goal from the beginning.

 

[littletommy]

Posts like his have been, and will be, cited in Court, and before various Legislative body's, as examples of the "lawless" mentality of gun owners.
NEVER forget that people are watching this, and every other site with the words GUN, Shooter, Firearms, or any other reference to shooting sports, in it's URL, with the avowed purpose of gathering "evidence" that we cannot be trusted to obey the laws.
Posts like the OP's are exactly what those people are looking for and he conveniently gave them more ammunition to use against us.
After reading his additional responses I'm beginning to believe that doing exactly that was his goal from the beginning.

And I would add, that if this post is used in that manner, there will be no mention of the 40 pages of bashing the OP for his actions.

 

[billybob44]

And I would add, that if this post is used in that manner, there will be no mention of the 40 pages of bashing the OP for his actions.

Could they at least show the Red Rep that he gained from this action?? Bill..

 

[UncleMike]

And I would add, that if this post is used in that manner, there will be no mention of the 40 pages of bashing the OP for his actions.

Yup!
Those posts will be "conveniently" left out.

 

[Hanu]

"Posts like the OP's are exactly what those people are looking for and he conveniently gave them more ammunition to use against us.
After reading his additional responses I'm beginning to believe that doing exactly that was his goal from the beginning."

You may have hit it right on the head. When I read his first post I thought he must be a young man who lacks opportunity for entertainment or postive activities (you've got to hope that cruising the back roads of Hancock county with his buddies was a last resort for entertainment). I thought the post was an attempt at "look at me; I'm bad enough to break the law and brag about it" and he thought the masses would pat him on the back for being so bold. You've made me think that I may be been naive regarding his motives. How disheartening to think someone would misrepresent one's self in an attempt to shed an unfavorable light on responsible people.

lashicoN was incorrect to say he was "simply taking a tool from Indiana to Ohio". He took a weapon from Indiana to Ohio. Let's be clear on that.

I hope we're wrong, UncleMike.

 

[gunman41mag]

I don't understand why you guys are judging the OP, He know what he's doing, but a lot of you guys you're holier-than-thou & gave the OP NEGATIVE REP just cause he made a decision you don't like, what is next negative rep for speeding, smoking in a building, eating some grapes in the supermarket before you pay for them, your breaking the law. You holier-than-thou members