(courtesy usatoday.com)

Make the jump for the autoplay video in question. Kristen Anderson’s set up is worth the price of admission – in that Reefer Madness kinda way. “How would YOU feel, you’re out here shopping you see this young man walking down the road with an assault rifle,” she asks, “you’re concerned so you call the police but when they show up there’s not much they can do.” You know; because it’s legal. The police trainer claiming the open carrier was “just looking for a payday” displays considerable Constitutional contempt. When the Commander says cops have a right to stop someone open carrying to check if they’re a convicted felon, he reveals his ignorance. Anyway, it’s good to see gun normalization in the news, n’est-ce-pas?

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

69 COMMENTS

  1. hhhmm normalization of gun ownership, say it aint so!

    Watching Shannon R Watts have a hissy fit melt down = priceless…
    Just Sayin….

  2. Can we drop the “OMG!____________!OMG” TMZ-ish type of headlines. I understand that it may be a matter of style, but we are not our nervous-wreck-shrieking adversaries.

    • That’s the whole point! We’re making fun of them.
      I like it, the more absurd the better.

      • I get that, and there is a good point to it but from a daily/hourly ttag reader, it is not doing much for me as far as making it entertaining to view the site or entice me to click on a link. I find myself ignoring these posts. In this specific one incident, I am glad I watched the video,as it had some quality information in it but had I not been bored looking for entertainment on the web, and this had been posted while I was at work, I would have skipped it.

        I am not complaining, I just see the point of OP

  3. How would I feel? Pleased. And in fact, that has happened here in Austin, except that it was more like a dozen young men with rifles. That was probably the safest intersection in the state of Texas for that few minutes.

    I certainly wouldn’t call a cop, though–somebody could get killed from doing that.

  4. The police trainer claiming the open carrier was “just looking for a payday”

    This from a welfare queen who’s not only looking for a payday but for a lifetime pension to boot.

  5. What kind of “disability” could someone have that disallowed them from owning a firearm?

      • The only disability I can think of would be a mental illness serious enough to have you committed for treatment. In which case you probably wouldn’t be walking quietly along minding your own business in the first place. So…

        • How about “mental disorder”. The mind cannot have a “disease”, because only physical organs can have a “disease”. Your heart, lungs, brain can be “diseased”, but your mind cannot possibly have a “disease”.

          The mind can be “disordered”, but the mind, not having any physical reality, CANNOT. Would you say your SOUL has a “disease”? Of course you can’t.

          Can your mind, or your soul, be taken out in an autopsy, weighed, and evalutated? Obviously not. Time to recognized that “mental illess” is a rather poor metaphor.

      • No, he really meant disability, as in “legal disability.” Term of art. If you are a felon, you have a “legal disability” that prevents you from owning firearms.

      • A disability means they could have a violent crime that disallows then from owning a gun. Disability is the term used for any reason why you would not legally be allowed to carry a firearm.

    • Unless there is something weird about Ohio, they absolutely DO NOT have the right to ID or detain you just because you are open carrying a firearm. Yes, they can stop and talk to you as long as the interaction is consensual. They can ask you for ID, but you don’t have to supply it. If they cannot articulate probable cause beyond “you have a gun,” then they have no right to hassle you.

  6. Where does probable cause fit into this? the “commander” claims the police have the right to stop you simply because you are open carrying to check that you are old enough, not a felon, not disabled? it is not a fully automatic (i added the last one).

    this would be like pulling someone over in car who has broken no laws to check that they are old enough, that their license is not expired, that they have insurance, and that they don’t have a dead body in the back of their trunk.

    the kid in the youtube video filed a lawsuit that was dismissed, however, the lorraine police department is doing extra training. <– this is what i want anyways. the primary reason lawsuits for money occur is because we, the people, can not get an individual public employee fired with a lawsuit. we can only go after the organization through money.

    • “like pulling someone over in car who has broken no laws to check that they are old enough, that their license is not expired, that they have insurance,”

      You mean like they do at DUI check points?

      • Hah!

        Well I guess they should set up firearm checkpoints at the mall. Stop and frisk everyone.

      • Safety checkpoints, too. Got stuck at one and the Officer ask me where I lived as I was pulling out da papahz. I turned and said, “Right there. Your cars are blocking my driveway.” as I pointed across the street.

    • Its not. If the only reason you are being questioned on foot that is for a open carry you. Do not have to show id or proof of anything only required to tell name no more no less

  7. Would she be concerned by that same young men traveling a down a rural hwy in a 6000lbs truck going 70mph in the opposite direction of her vehicle with nothing between them, sans a few feet space and a tiny yellow line?

    Likely not, because her “concerns” are based on what she perceives to be scary and threatening, and her lack of “concerns” are based on what she believes is safe and non-threatening…

    But, the reality is her concerns are not based reason, but on irrational fear and misinformation.

    • Actually, I think her major concern is finding sufficient concerns to stay on the air doing segments about them.

  8. What’s up with the editing of comments? I had a nice conversation going with Ralph above, and now it has been deep-6ed into the memory hole. I came to see if he saw my reply, but now it’s completely gone. I thought the moderated comments were just going to be for inappropriate talk. What gives? I thought we were above censorship?

    • I’m not sure if the exchange was “moderated,” or if the system has gone totally wonky. I’m getting “slow down, you’re posting too fast” messages. I feel like I’ve gone back in time, there’s a bad Simon and Garfunkel song paying in the background and I’m not feeling groovy.

      • I was getting those too. I especially enjoyed the one I got after I knocked off for dinner and came back after.

      • Feeling groovy… the 59th Street Bridge Song.

        Yeah, me too, Ralph. I got a “posting too fast” on my very first post today. How is that “too fast”? Something has gone wonky. Has Spammy stolen some of my Tylenol-3s? Bring ’em back! My lower back is far outta whack.

  11. “just looking for a payday”

    i wonder if this yahoo would’ve presumed that Rosa Parks was just looking for a payday, too?

  12. I have a ccw, and I think open carry makes us look bad. Most of the time it only serves to reinforce the stereotypes ant-gunners have of us. All they see is a dumbass walking around in public with a gun, getting arresting while ranting about the constitution. That’s all they see not the symbolic message behind it. I think it actually sets our cause back. Most of the guys I know that are on favor of open carry are dbags. Conceal it!

    • Carrying a handgun under the auspices of a concealed carry license is the exercise of a government privilege and NOT the exercise of one’s right to keep and bear arms. The privilege comes from government and can be altered or revoked at any time. You are choosing to defend a government privilege to the detriment of an unalienable individual right.

      With all due respect, it’s not about your fragile ego and what you think will make you ‘look bad’. Apparently, you fail to grasp the basis of Liberty and the RKBA’s necessity to a free state.

      • I understand what you are saying, I live in East TN where it is normal to see folks with guns, but nobody I know thinks it is ok to walk down the street with a rifle or handgun just to prove they have the right to do so. I have the right to stick my John Thomas in a blender, but that doesn’t mean I will, just to prove I can. Personally, if I saw someone with a rifle walking around in public I’m likely to shoot them. Especially if I have my wife and 7 year old daughter with me. my point is, think of how it looks to the people trying to take away our rights. It gives them ammunition (pun intended) and it scares them, which in turn makes them less likely to budge on anything to do with guns. That’s sets the whole cause back. Just my 2¢.

        • There is a shift in thinking that must occur before people will really understand Liberty and rights.

          but nobody I know thinks it is ok to walk down the street with a rifle or handgun just to prove they have the right to do so.

          The point is this, A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The daily, public ability to keep and bear arms, including long guns, is necessary if we wish to maintain a free nation. Regardless of what some might think, it is still necessary. We cannot maintain a free state on wishful thinking… it requires the ability of the People to resist tyranny at a minute’s notice. If the only people seen bearing long guns were those at time of strife with government, just how effective would that be as a bulwark against tyranny? If you want to be free then you must accept the risks and responsibilities of Liberty. They are inseparable. You cannot be free without accepting the responsibilities and risks that come along with it.

          If some do not wish a free state then please, by all means, work on a constitutional amendment. At least, that’s the honest way to go about changing the contract by which the People agreed to be governed.

          • I understand the 2nd amendment. I understand why some people choose to open carry. I just think it hurts more than it helps. That’s all. You all are proving my point, as soon as anything other than what you all believe is spoken then you tear the person a new one. Freedom also means you have to accept ideas that might be different than yours. You don’t have to follow them, but you do have to allow them. If not we are no better than liberal sheep who accept no other paradigm but their own. You guys need to understand that this is my opinion and that’s all, and I am entitled to it. Just like you are entitled to yours. I didn’t say you are a failure at life because you don’t agree with me. I’m glad some people don’t agree with me, cause it would make things mighty boring. It just goes to show that we will turn on each other faster than wild man going to shit.

          • It’s not ABOUT you or your trembling chums, who should run and hide when real men and women are on the street… it’s about SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Shall I define “shall not” for you?

        • Personally, if I saw someone with a rifle walking around in public I’m likely to shoot them.

          Then the problem is with you, not them. Think about your statement; is that even rational? You, an individual living in a free nation with an absolute heritage based upon the RKBA, would “likely shoot” someone merely bearing a rifle? Seriously?

          • Yes, seriously. I’m a veteran and being in a situation where I don’t know someone and they are walking towards me with a friggin rifle, and we are not in a combat zone then they better let me know what they are doing and why pretty quick.

        • That’s sets the whole cause back. Just my 2¢.

          Apparently, we fight for a different ’cause’.

          • We are fighting for the same cause. Some choose to riot in the street, while others choose to strike silently under the cover of darkness.

              • I have never seen a place where one comment that was just an opinion, got so many people so bent out of shape. Hell I just happened upon this blog and thought oh this is cool, it seems like some rational people are on here. Obviously I was wrong. It’s just an opinion, I’m obviously not going to change your mind and you aren’t going to change mine. Never seen such a disrespect to a marine that served his country proudly either.

        • Are you a cop then? I can’t imagine anyone with that attitude who doesn’t also have cop immunity getting old enough to have a 7 year old child without also having been convicted of at least one violent felony.

        • I understand the 2nd amendment. I understand why some people choose to open carry. I just think it hurts more than it helps. That’s all.

          You expressed your opinion and then went on to state that you might shoot someone for merely carrying a rifle. Fine, you think it hurts more than it helps and I stated clearly that I believe that NOT carrying a rifle hurts our free state more than it helps.

          You all are proving my point, as soon as anything other than what you all believe is spoken then you tear the person a new one.

          Proving what point? I assure you, sir, that I used some kid gloves when responding. A ‘new one’ hadn’t even begun to be ‘torn’. 😉

          Freedom also means you have to accept ideas that might be different than yours. You don’t have to follow them, but you do have to allow them.

          That is incorrect, sir. Our government cannot violate protections on free speech per our Constitution. An individual can tell you to STFU if they wish. However, I did no such of a thing. I attempted to sway your opinion. I listened and I disagreed. What’s the problem?

          If not we are no better than liberal sheep who accept no other paradigm but their own.

          Perhaps this thinking is part of the problem. It’s not about accepting a paradigm. It’s about understanding unalienable individual rights. I contend that you haven’t a clue as to their nature and their true utility to a free people.

          You guys need to understand that this is my opinion and that’s all, and I am entitled to it. Just like you are entitled to yours.

          Just because one has an opinion doesn’t mean that they are correct. Not all opinions are equal, IMHO.

          I didn’t say you are a failure at life because you don’t agree with me.

          I don’t claim that you are a ‘failure’. Indeed, the fact that you have taken the time and thought necessary to express your opinion leads me to believe the opposite. You think and you care. That’s important, IMHO.

          I’m glad some people don’t agree with me, cause it would make things mighty boring.

          Echo chambers often are. Preaching to the choir doesn’t save many souls. 😉

          It just goes to show that we will turn on each other faster than wild man going to shit.

          I will defend Liberty to my dying breath; irrespective of who it is that’s misrepresenting it. I make no apologies for it.

          Be safe and carry on!

          • I’m tired of all you armchair preachers talking about defending liberty and freedom. You have probably never done more than spew thought diarrhea from the safety of your home. I have actually fought and was wounded doing two tours in Afganistan for these freedoms and liberties that we all enjoy. What have you done? I hear all this shit and I don’t think any of you even have the smallest clue about really fighting for freedom and liberty. It’s easy to talk a big game, but when the time comes to get down most of you can’t put your money where your mouth is. I have a lot of dead friends that paid the ultimate price for your freedom. I don’t want to see them take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens either, but spare me the horse shit about fighting and defending freedom until you actually do it. By the way, you’re welcome and don’t fucking lecture me about the constitution I swore an oath to it!

              • What is that supposed to mean? I don’t agree with you so I must somehow be immature? I was grown up enough to enlist and fight so I think I am grown up enough to say what I think no matter what anyone else says. I think I have more that earned that right.

        • Yes, seriously. I’m a veteran and being in a situation where I don’t know someone and they are walking towards me with a friggin rifle, and we are not in a combat zone then they better let me know what they are doing and why pretty quick.

          Who are you that they had “better let” you know? Man, I suffer from PTSD and even I am not that edgy. If I were carrying my rifle in public (yes, I do that sometimes); if you elicited a verbal response from me at all, you probably wouldn’t like it. 😉

              • I understand that. I started off by saying that it does the opposite of what it’s trying to accomplish.

              • IN YOUR OPINION. Should we stop protesting, also, because “free speech makes us look bad”? Try and step outside of this bubble of yours, just for a while. That’s the only way you’re going to see how wrong you are.

              • I’m not saying stop protesting. I’m saying don’t walk around in public with a rifle strapped on. I’m sorry you guys can’t handle a different view on something.

  13. It gets under my skin when I continually hear or read the term “rights” misused in American media. A government is not alive, has no conscience, and has no rights. Government has only privilege. By extension, agents of government only posses privileges when acting on government’s behalf. Government cannot grant that which it does not posses… rights! Government can only grant privileges. Individuals are born with rights, not governments. While it’s true that the individual officers posses rights, when they accept a pay check and act under the authority of government, they are operating purely on privilege. If an officer wishes to assert his right then he ought to remove the uniform and act as an individual. How far would he get if he strolled up as another citizen and attempted to prone out an armed man? How would that be accepted by the People? If I aim a firearm at another person and make demands, asserting that it is my right to do so, I’d be properly considered a criminal absent some egregious prior criminal action by the person being detained . It is the privilege of the office that gives the officer the privilege of certain limited actions under the law; not rights.

    We do the cause of Liberty a great disservice, IMHO, when we allow this gross mis-characterization of the nature of privilege vs right to go unchallenged.

    //rant mode off//

  14. There’s no need for me to respond much to that last bit. You’ve outed much of your thinking with your own words. My intent wasn’t to get you riled but, apparently, you’ve been hoisted with your own petard. That’s some messed up stuff there; you’re a statist with a completely skewed understanding of Liberty and empires. I wish you well.

    I’m tired of all you armchair preachers talking about defending liberty and freedom. You have probably never done more than spew thought diarrhea from the safety of your home. I have actually fought and was wounded doing two tours in Afganistan for these freedoms and liberties that we all enjoy. What have you done? I hear all this shit and I don’t think any of you even have the smallest clue about really fighting for freedom and liberty. It’s easy to talk a big game, but when the time comes to get down most of you can’t put your money where your mouth is. I have a lot of dead friends that paid the ultimate price for your freedom. I don’t want to see them take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens either, but spare me the horse shit about fighting and defending freedom until you actually do it. By the way, you’re welcome and don’t fucking lecture me about the constitution I swore an oath to it!

  16. Bobby said:
    ” Personally, if I saw someone with a rifle walking around in public I’m likely to shoot them”

    If this is a true statement you shouldn’t be carrying a gun and quite probably ought to be locked up in jail.
    You don’t shoot unless and until there is a reasonable belief of serious injury or death
    Remarks like THAT are what does harm to our cause, not open carrying

    An open carrier is clear and honest about his intentions, and until fairly recently, carrying a concealed weapon was a crime and considered cowardly, only practiced by the lowest of criminals

    I truly hope that comment wasn’t sincere,,,,

Comments are closed.