Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Open carry?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Griffin" data-source="post: 1491029" data-attributes="member: 18194"><p>I have to be honest, when I first read the quoted comment above I was highly affronted, not just because it pertains to my age group, but because it is a widely accepted form of hypocrisy that has infected our society.</p><p></p><p>Since I am 18, this hit close to home, so my response will understandably be impassioned.</p><p></p><p>There are several faults in the above quotation, foremost being that such limited thinking harms gun rights. The most egregious being only trained, licensed, responsible adults to openly carry guns, such a statement implies that the general public at large is not fit to carry guns, unless they have been properly deemed worthy of the most basic human right to defend oneself. According to the statement, it seems that they must undergo some process, (I assume run by the state or at least governed thereby), that allows them the privilege to carry openly (or closed). The problem is, power granted can be taken away, its not the governments jurisdiction to filter who is eligible to exercise their rights, because it is a fundamental right that transcends government law, every person should be able to defend themselves, it just so happens that that defense most often takes the form of a firearm. Limitations put upon that right openly suppress liberty. Oklahoma should really strive to adopt full 2nd Amendment gun rights similar to Alaska, instead of these meager bills.</p><p> </p><p> do we really want an 18-year-old who might not even be responsible enough to operate a vehicle, who might be blotto on drugs or booze, who might be homicidally angry at his girlfriend, to be carrying a gun on his hip?</p><p></p><p>Whats infuriating is that such a statement makes zero sense, and contains many assumptions that have little credence. It seems to assume that all 18-year-olds are law breakers, do drugs, drink underage, have anger issues, and then they decide to carry guns. No person who acted like that should carry a gun, not because they are 18, but because they are lawless.</p><p></p><p>Furthermore I wasnt aware that only people of a certain age have the privilege of human rights. When one turns 21 do they somehow inherit maturity, and character, do they suddenly have a great sense of morality? Why is it that 18-year-olds can fight to defend their country, even die for it, but arent trusted to carry a gun until they turn 21? Why should it be 21? Whos to say that they are worthy at that age, perhaps we should make it 25, heck 35; maybe no citizen should even have the right to carry!</p><p>By putting arbitrary limitations on gun rights, you are oppressing lawful citizens; 18-year-olds have a right to own their guns, why cant they carry to protect themselves and their loved ones? After all, in the eyes of the law, they are adults. </p><p></p><p>The current open carry bill with its limited clause to allow open carry fits nicely within that line of thinking. In the most simplistic of terms, it just another example of the evil of positive law.</p><p></p><p>Chris Griffin</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Griffin, post: 1491029, member: 18194"] I have to be honest, when I first read the quoted comment above I was highly affronted, not just because it pertains to my age group, but because it is a widely accepted form of hypocrisy that has infected our society. Since I am 18, this hit close to home, so my response will understandably be impassioned. There are several faults in the above quotation, foremost being that such limited thinking harms gun rights. The most egregious being only trained, licensed, responsible adults to openly carry guns, such a statement implies that the general public at large is not fit to carry guns, unless they have been properly deemed worthy of the most basic human right to defend oneself. According to the statement, it seems that they must undergo some process, (I assume run by the state or at least governed thereby), that allows them the privilege to carry openly (or closed). The problem is, power granted can be taken away, its not the governments jurisdiction to filter who is eligible to exercise their rights, because it is a fundamental right that transcends government law, every person should be able to defend themselves, it just so happens that that defense most often takes the form of a firearm. Limitations put upon that right openly suppress liberty. Oklahoma should really strive to adopt full 2nd Amendment gun rights similar to Alaska, instead of these meager bills. do we really want an 18-year-old who might not even be responsible enough to operate a vehicle, who might be blotto on drugs or booze, who might be homicidally angry at his girlfriend, to be carrying a gun on his hip? Whats infuriating is that such a statement makes zero sense, and contains many assumptions that have little credence. It seems to assume that all 18-year-olds are law breakers, do drugs, drink underage, have anger issues, and then they decide to carry guns. No person who acted like that should carry a gun, not because they are 18, but because they are lawless. Furthermore I wasnt aware that only people of a certain age have the privilege of human rights. When one turns 21 do they somehow inherit maturity, and character, do they suddenly have a great sense of morality? Why is it that 18-year-olds can fight to defend their country, even die for it, but arent trusted to carry a gun until they turn 21? Why should it be 21? Whos to say that they are worthy at that age, perhaps we should make it 25, heck 35; maybe no citizen should even have the right to carry! By putting arbitrary limitations on gun rights, you are oppressing lawful citizens; 18-year-olds have a right to own their guns, why cant they carry to protect themselves and their loved ones? After all, in the eyes of the law, they are adults. The current open carry bill with its limited clause to allow open carry fits nicely within that line of thinking. In the most simplistic of terms, it just another example of the evil of positive law. Chris Griffin [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Open carry?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom