molonlabetn

By loose definition, a 'right' is a natural, intrinsic, and undeniable state which all humans deserve equally for the entire duration of their existence. And likewise, a 'privilege' is a revokeable, temporary benefit created by a collective, and rewarded to deserving individuals. The only commonly held 'rights' which truly match the definition of a 'right', are, the right to exist... since that alone is granted by forces other than human; and the right to think/feel, since emotions and thoughts cannot be prevented or controlled by any human power. Thoughts, feelings, and existence are all intertwined, and in each human, independent of governance by other individuals or collectives. The argument, then, is whether or not the right to exist supports a right to an ability to prevent non-existence. I believe that it does, moreover I have the right to believe so, and act accordingly. I also believe that the willful actions of any individual or collective to revoke the existence, thoughts, or feelings of another individual in turn surrender their own. If people have no 'rights', then neither does the government, which is made up of people. If there is no tangible proof of rights, there is likewise no greater 'proof' for the govt's collective 'right' of authority over my existence.

I prefer Semi-Autos which are designed to be safely carried without an active, manual safety being engaged... Even the Beretta 92F can be carried this way, even though it does have a safety. But, on the other hand, I also prefer a uniform trigger pull without transition between DA/SA, even though I have and do carry those types frequently. For this reason, I have come to appreciate my XD more and more... since it has a passive grip-safety which requires no other conscious effort to disengage than properly gripping the firearm. And, it's uniform trigger-pull is one of the best available in its class. Single-action function with a designed manual safety, such as the 1911, is also an excellent system... the primary drawback is the required training/practice/familiarity with the specific weapon, in order to repeatably bring it into action quickly. If that proficiency is focused on, however, this type of system can be very effective (arguably, more-so than others). I am leaning towards an H&K or Sig pistol, next, with the LEM or DAK trigger action.

Only if you think that the RKBA is endowed by the government. It is not. The RKBA is currently oppressed by the government upon the minority, which contradicts the 2nd Amendment... it was meant to prevent the government (by definition, the people), from infringing upon the RKBA of the rest of the people. Rights are not governed by geographical location... in Alaska/Vermont, for instance, the right to keep and bear arms is not restricted. In this (and most other) states, it is... But the point is that the right does exist, this state simply does not recognize it. A right existing, and a right not being recognized are two different things which you are trying to equate.

Exercising one's rights is rarely popular... If the right thing to do was governed by majority support, this country would not exist. Governmental restrictions on carrying firearms do not constitute a removal of that right, they are simply a hindrance (a violation, if you will...). The 'permit' system is an aberration, one which most people, including me, put up with for the sake of compliance with the laws out of respect for the law... That does not mean that those who do not recognize the government as the source of their rights wouldn't carry anyways even if it was not accepted... Self-defense being more critical to maintaining life and liberty than mere social approval. The government derives its power from the consent of the people, and without that consent, if the government becomes destructive and oppressive, it is the right of the people to throw it off. Noone here is suggesting taking that right lightly... but it is a simple fact that the majority are willing to suffer the exchange of liberty for perceived safety when that suffrage is familiar. Most people are less inclined to resist abuses of government power upon their rights... to the point of denying them to themselves, and others. Open-carry is merely a symbol of the rights which some of us cherish, obviously if that became illegal, it would indicate that the majority of people do not find it acceptable... But that would not mean that the RKBA does not exist. It means that the majority is wrong (big surprise). OC is still legal, and because it is, it is no less legitimate than carrying concealed, or owning a gun at all. I realize that it will take more of our rights being restricted for the majority of gun-owners to actually stand up and be counted. When the government comes to take away your concealed carry permit and handguns, the majority of hunters will use the same arguments we have seen here to downplay our right to self-defense... And when they come for the hunter's rifles and shotguns, the unarmed populace will use the same arguments against their right to have them. It isn't civil disobedience if the act is not illegal. Does that mean when homosexuals' and minorities' rights were previously not recognized, that they in fact did not actually exist?

I can have enough money left over to buy several complete guns for different tasks...

From what I've seen, the Remington is tougher... steel reciever vs. the Mossburg's aluminum. Other than that, it's a wash. Personally, I think that the Mossburg is easier/faster to load, having no hinged shell-lifter to get my thumb stuck in.

Perhaps the reason why we are losing the 'hearts and minds' of the general public about the RKBA is, in part, that no-one sees normal folks exercising the right. If other interest-groups' public displays advocating homosexuality, racial equality and other 'civil-rights' issues can be so successful in bringing them into the main-stream of society (when they were just as unpopular at first)... I submit that we are simply not pursuing our agenda in the most effective way. Simply hoping to be ignored is not the best tactic for expanding our freedom.

I think the reasons to OC are just as valid as the reasons to not OC... And either way, the reasons presented on both sides can be read as excuses.

12ga Pump. Bird-shot for snakes Buck-shot for larger predators Slugs for longer range Signal flares for emergencies

I'm down to 1 XD... The 4" .357 is my favorite out of the 3 I've had. The SC 9mm and the Tactical .45gap weren't quite my cup of tea. I'll be hanging on to this one though. I might need to buzz my hair again, though, to further my Tactical-Metrosexual appearance...

That's my XD-357... I carry it nearly as much as my P239. http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/member.php?u=465

They sure do run their classes and training sessions while open-carrying though... even if they aren't verbally advocating it.

This was not the official Class III shoot, so nobody get their panties in a wad ... A date has not yet been announced for that one. This was a sampling, as it were... I see that Oleg has a pic up of my Tantal and I contributing to the heat-death of the planet... That was fun. Linked from Oleg's website:

Compliments of ETS-Inc and Hero-Gear: http://olegvolk.net/gallery/various/herogear/ http://olegvolk.net/gallery/technology/arms/FAL5665.jpg.html http://olegvolk.net/gallery/technology/arms/aac/muffler5763.jpg.html Great photos, Oleg! It was awesome to meet everyone, and dump one mag through an M4 with da' switch (I see Oleg even got a picture of it )... I spent the rest of the time breaking in my AK74 (which performed flawlessly, btw... 240rds total. Even managed to get it to bump-fire a bit). Looking forward to the next outing ... hopefully once it gets cooler! (did I mention that it was HOT?)

I'll be there, barring my work schedule... We'll see how it goes.

I actually agree with your belief, Mars (and others who've reasoned this way). But let's remember that the anti-gun element will push for a ban on any type of carry or firearms ownership regardless of how it is presented to them. For that reason, I prefer to be a visible proponent of carry... if my sole concern was self-protection and obscurity from criticism, I would only ever conceal. I do respect the fact that the overwhelming majority of gun owners will only go that far. But I am ultimately only responsible for my own beliefs and actions.

And all I'm saying is that Government/LE should not be given a free-pass to pick and choose which laws they enforce... The 2nd Amendement being the first law on the subject. That's a real debate winner there

I'm pretty easy to find. If OC was outlawed, I wouldn't OC... That's simply prudent, since it's not worth starting a freaking revolution over. But it's a rather pointless provision to have if those who want to use it are disparaged, as if they are somehow worse than folks who carry concealed. Our enemies draw no distinction. Most of us want the carry of firearms to become commonplace in society. It will either be accepted or rejected if we do something to forward that ideal... but it will surely be subdued if we do nothing (or, do it unnoticed). 5 years. By what authority does the government restrict the wearing of arms? Brute force. That's not the way it was intended, and if you base whether or not you have a particular right, based on the opinion of the government, you will always be at their mercy. I am aware that you have fought this battle before, you know that the system is wrong. It is simply tyranny and intimidation.

I've got a Norelco 'Cool-Skin' that has turned out to be my favorite... But I do sometimes use a Gilette M3.

Frankly, that's the type of government which the 2nd Amendment was meant to allow us to defend ourselves from. It isn't a right unless you act upon it. Want proof that it is a right? Try preventing me. addendum: Public and Governmental acceptance of a given practice does not constitute a 'right', and non-acceptance does not constitute a lack thereof.

A privilege is only a privilege if one exercises it in greater fear of the repercussions for it, than not. A right is exercised regardless of the consequences, with greater consideration given to the merit of doing so, than the fear of rejection. Most gun owners seem to be more concerned with the views and opinion of the general public and government, than their own well-being... afraid that their privileges will be taken away. I think this has alot to do with most people being unwilling to think of themselves as social outcasts, thus they imitate 'normal' non-gun-owning people in order to fit in, and then vote secretly, hoping that others will keep the outward spirit of the RKBA alive for them. Those people have no place to criticise others' activism. The RKBA only really exists when claimed and exercised... So, I must agree that most will only ever have a privilege, because that's all they were seeking. That's the choice of the individual, not to be blamed on anyone else.

Fixed... Sweet weapon, btw... It will serve you well.

Different strokes for different folks... Problem is, the damn thing was loaded!

Heh! Yeah right... I must be dreadfully unlucky then... I've got way more types of ammo than I have guns to fire it in. Rainy-day stash, so to speak... I'm considering making wall decorations out of the cut lids from all of these com-bloc ammo-tins, kinda like some folks do old license plates. I might start collecting those, so, keep me in mind.

Why does that matter if they have no right to live?