Going to a protest with a loaded weapon is stupid. Going to a protest with an unloaded weapon is stupid. Dressing up and playing vigilante is wrong.So what does qualify to be considered “cosplay” to you. BTW - it was an “ammunition vest” AND one of those dangerous-looking “ASSAULT-TYPE WEAPON” he was wearing.
Is that enough?
Or…would he have to be white?
I dont know. Why are you calling the presumably white counterprotesters “gun nut cosplayers”, but wont call the black guy dressed up in a green vest and mean looking assault rifle the same thing?Why would the color of the person matter?
They are both gun nut Cosplay idiots.I dont know. Why are you calling the presumably white counterprotesters “gun nut cosplayers”, but wont call the black guy dressed up in a green vest and mean looking assault rifle the same thing?
Why don’t you fall back a bit, friend? Jharek is a quality poster and you’re being needlessly aggressive.You don’t have a clue.
Why don’t you fix you a nice warm cup of tea and quit pretending to have a clue as to what is going on in Louisville Kentucky.
I am in Virginia, an open carry state, and I just think it’s silly to open carry anywhere. I don’t see the purpose. The right to carry is established law, so “exercising” the right is nothing more than “look at me” in my mind.A little bit, thanks!
I generally agree with you. I dont open carry because if I am ever in a situation to defend myself or others I want to be able to have the element of surprise to launch my counter-attack.I am in Virginia, an open carry state, and I just think it’s silly to open carry anywhere. I don’t see the purpose. The right to carry is established law, so “exercising” the right is nothing more than “look at me” in my mind.
Because all it takes for evil to succeed in this world is for good men to do nothing. And Marxism/Communism is an evil.So, if you’re not in a position, legally and morally, to kill people, I don’t see the use of dressing up and arming up and saying you’re “restoring order”.
Yep.I generally agree with you. I dont open carry because if I am ever in a situation to defend myself or others I want to be able to have the element of surprise to launch my counter-attack.
I don’t see how that applies here.Because all it takes for evil to succeed in this world is for good men to do nothing. And Marxism/Communism is an evil.
Yeah, but I think open carry borders on brandishing. If you are in a situation where people are throwing bricks, and you are not at home, you should leave the area. You are not the police and are not there to restore order.I can see a group of people might want to carry openly as a visible signature of deterrance. (Ie: dont theow a brick at those guys, they have guns.).
It applies here because the legitimate protestors are overrun/overshadowed by the Marxists who simply want to destroy.I don’t see how that applies here.
Now, I think that police should protect the peaceful protesters and arrest the violent protesters. That’s easy to say but maybe not easy to do.
Yes. Good men should act against evil. But they are being prevented by the Democrat political leaders. So other good men are needed to stop this evil.think that police should protect the peaceful protesters and arrest the violent protesters. That’s easy to say but maybe not easy to do.
Does a police officer brandish their weapon by openly carrying? Of course not. Neither does anyone else, nor does it meet ANY legal definition of “brandishing” I have read.but I think open carry borders on brandishing
And allow evil to prevail? What if the police wont or cant?If you are in a situation where people are throwing bricks, and you are not at home, you should leave the area. You are not the police and are not there to restore order.
I said borders on. I know the definition. I also know that civilians are not police officers. A civilian has no reason to open carry.Does a police officer brandish their weapon by openly carrying? Of course not. Neither does anyone else, nor does it meet ANY legal definition of “brandishing” I have read.
Civilians are not the police. You know that you may you your weapon to protect your life and the life of family members around you. You may not use your weapon to effect arrests or stop people from throwing bricks.And allow evil to prevail? What if the police wont or cant?
Doesn’t matter. The government has no right to prevent me. If I find I have a reason to do this, then I shall not be prevented.A civilian has no reason to open carry.
Technically I am a retired federal LEO (although this is effectively a joke from my previous organization) so I could.You may not use your weapon to effect arrests
Yes, we absolutely could do this. Bricks are deadly weapons.or stop people from throwing bricks.
I agree you can open carry. I just don’t know why you should.Doesn’t matter. The government has no right to prevent me. If I find I have a reason to do this, then I shall not be prevented.
Only a “citizen’s arrest” and only in jurisdictions that allow it.Technically I am a retired federal LEO (although this is effectively a joke from my previous organization) so I could.
Throwing bricks at what? or whom?Yes, we absolutely could do this. Bricks are deadly weapons.
This is a tangent, but not legally. Although never really used, my service has some of the broadest law enforcement legal authority found in the US. And since military retirees are not really “retired” as much as put on indefinite recall with pay, military laws still apply to us (For example, I am still legally under the jurisdiction of the UCMJ). Therefore 14 USC 89 still applies to me as well. So, legally, if I see a violation of federal law, I could still make an arrest. At least, that is what has been explained to me. Of course, I would have nobody to prosecute that arrest as my “agency” does not encourage such behavior. (They really don’t encourage active duty types to arrest anyone either). So it’s all really a hypothetical moot point.Only a “citizen’s arrest” and only in jurisdictions that allow it.
I think morally we have the duty to retreat when we can. However I am glad that most states clearly say one has no DUTY to retreat as that just opens anyone who defends themselves up to overzealous prosecutors who can ALWAYS use a retrospectoscope to find a way that someone COULD have retreated.Trowing bricks at you? Back off. No way to retreat? Defend yourself, yes.