So some people in Florida are nervous about seeing someone with a gun? So some “only ones”- the guys with badges need to be re-trained to not open fire on random armed citizens?
The fact that the “thin blue line” needs to be re-trained to not open fire on armed citizens is on the one hand laughable and on the other down right disturbing. One would think “the only ones”, would be trained that they need a reason to open fire from their first day of training before ever getting a badge. After all, my three readers (me, myself and I) would get sent to prison, and rightfully so, if they opened fire on someone, for no reason.
If I see someone with a gun, I don’t spook. In the woods, I see people occasionally, and when I do, they’re always openly carrying, either long guns or pistols or both, regardless of the season. If they’re openly carrying a pistol it’s typically a full sized duty pistol, as there are lots of bear, wolves and coyotes, so a pocket pistol makes no sense. But I don’t scream “save me”. Only a fool would walk around up there without a gun. I myself, openly carry up there. And nobody’s ever called the sheriff or the DNR… Then again, you usually can’t get cell service there either, which makes it all the more imperative to have a gun.
Now where I live, I think other than the guys who work at the gun store, I’ve only seen one guy openly carrying. My first thought and reaction was to see if I could tell what kind of pistol he had, and I remember being certain it was a S&W polymer framed compact pistol, beyond that I had no idea. The guys at the gun store typically carry 1911’s, and since I don’t have any interest in 1911’s, I don’t give their pistols a second look.
If I saw someone at the grocery store, or drug store, or passed someone while taking a walk around the neighborhood, openly carrying, I wouldn’t be concerned, unless of course they’re acting strange, which applies to anyone, openly armed or not. Barring strange behavior, my first thought would be to see if I could tell the make and model of the gun they had.
The one thing the writer of the piece states which I completely am opposed to was, There is probably nothing going on, but having law enforcement ask them what the deal is, making sure they’re not looking at the next Parkland killer, is fine. If there’s nothing to be concerned about, they can let the person go on their merry way. If there is, well…
Why automatically assume an armed citizen is the “next Parkland killer” for merely openly bearing his arm(s)? Is simply bearing arm(s), reasonable suspicion? Probable cause? Let’s face it, since cops admit they have to be re-trained to not open fire on some random citizen openly carrying a gun, then isn’t calling the cops for no reason other than his being armed be “SWAT-ing”? Isn’t that a nearly sure fire way to get the poor citizen murdered? Isn’t there something called the Second Amendment?
But then the writer contradicts himself, when he writes the next passage, I’m still bothered that anyone sees another exercising their rights as threatening in and of itself. That’s something we need to work on.
So it must be asked, if he’s “bothered” that people can view someone “exercising their rights” as “threatening”, then why in the previous paragraph does he suggest calling the cops to make sure someone isn’t “the next Parkland killer”?
I don’t feel threatened by seeing a fellow citizen openly bearing arms. Do you?
Equip, train, pray and never disarm.
Leave a Reply