I'm all for people exercising their 2nd amendment rights but this is just retarded

Anyone who reads my comments knows I'm pro gun, and usually I support people who are active in keeping law abiding citizens rights to carry/own firearms. Except this guy, it's people like this that give law abiding gun owners a bad rep. When you do this, you're asking for a confrontation with the law, which is exactly what happened.

Props to this cop, he was extremely professional and handled this like a champ, I swear the guy deserves a medal for this really.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=589_1345502474

I am surprised he can even have it out like that.. But yeah that's really dumb the officer didn't even pull his gun out he should be grateful for that.

Fucking moron. Even if your gun is semi automatic, you don't take it out and carry it if it looks like an automatic rifle. I'm like you gun guys, I agree with people owning guns, and I plan to own some when I grow up. But this is stupid, it doesn't take an intelligent man to defend his rights after provoking an argument, it takes a trained monkey. This guy, he's a monkey. Art, you and the other gun guys here, Volt and Metal come to mind especially, you're all the type of gun-owner I wanna be.

Seemed like he was looking for an asshole cop to troll and this one wasn't. Non the less the guy is a dick.

yeah the cop handled it great, and same here. I want to hunt when I get older and stuff, own guns but why does anyone need to openly carry it around, it's just stupid. It does nothing but make other people uncomfortable >.<

I was about ready give a standing ovation at the end of this video. That officer is god-tier.

People just use the amendments and spout them off like they have half a clue what they're talking about. I'm pro gun laws, owning guns, and anything else, but you wouldn't see me walking down a street carrying something that would draw attention to myself.

Siren wrote:yeah the cop handled it great, and same here. I want to hunt when I get older and stuff, own guns but why does anyone need to openly carry it around, it's just stupid. It does nothing but make other people uncomfortable >.<

yeah I agree the guy is stupid as hell for drawing attention to himself,if he wanted to so bad he should just conceal carry a pistol or whatever....

That's honestly one of the only good cops I've ever seen,he seemed like a real cool guy,wish there were good cops in my town.

the guy filming seems like SUCH a dick just looking for attention and trolling cops...I've seen some of his other videos on youtube,all the guy does with his life is walk around town with his guns and acts so surprised when the cops stop him.

>___> I love guns and stuff and even I get uncomfortable as hell when I see people open carrying, idk why.Just freaks me out,I guess I think they'll shoot me..lol

How does he expect the officer to know if its semi or fully automatic just based on looking from 5 feet away? If it is fully auto he has to take the guy in. Full and semi auto weren't even terms when the bill of rights was made.

Duck wrote:How does he expect the officer to know if its semi or fully automatic just based on looking from 5 feet away? If it is fully auto he has to take the guy in. Full and semi auto weren't even terms when the bill of rights was made.

Interesting thought, what would the Drafters think of modern gun laws? I mean, back when the "right to bear arms" was written, I think the most advanced weapons were flintlock and breech-load rifle. If I'm not mistaken, you could fire, what, 6 rounds a minute at max? And from what I've read, they were horrendously inaccurate. Nowadays (Volt, correct me if I'm wrong) with the right permits you can buy a gun that empties a 30 round magazine in 4 seconds with frightening accuracy.

You have to go through a mess load of hoops and checks in order to get such a weapon.

Select fire weapons are Class III, and you must have the permit to do so, submit to a thorough background check (and I think a psych evaluation as well), pay a tax stamp of $200 for the weapon itself, have a letter signed and approved by your local Chief LEO, and have its serial number registered within your local Police agency' database that you are in possession of such a weapon. They have the right to confiscate said weapon if it is suspect to have been involved in a crime.

Let's not forget that the weapon must also be grandfathered in by being registered prior to the Assault Weapons ban of 1986 which banned the sales of select fire firearms. Such weapons are very uncommon and come with a premium price tag (Expect to be paying upwards to 9-30k for an automatic firearm, YMMV depending on the make/model and rarity of the firearm)

Furthermore, you must wait at least a 6-12 month waiting period before you can even pick up the weapon.

So all this bullshit about how "Criminals are using machine guns and we need to ban all guns" is absolutely ludicrous. There are so many rules and regulations you must follow to own one that any sane criminal would simply steal one if possible or buy one off the black market.

The only thing these "Gun Control" laws are doing is hurting the people who obey the law and have no intention of bringing harm to another human being in the first place.

But don't you dare try to explain that to some of these retards who think guns are the root of all villainy, because they're so narrow minded and tunnel visioned that they'll never understand/refuse to understand/incapable of understanding.

Wow, all that so you can own an automatic gun?

I don't see the point in all these laws. I mean, when was the last time a criminal followed them?

Artimise Flare wrote:/all this stuff

Very thorough, thanks for that. To make it a much easier comparison, how about a semi automatic rifle? I see them on open sale in Gander Mountain, AKs, M4-variants, ARs, all of those "replica" weapons that can fire with astounding accuracy, but are semi automatic. They're not "spray and pray, bullet hale" weapons, but simple "one pull, one shot". Those in themselves are ungodly compared to the guns at the time of the Founding.


Also, thanks for the lesson Art, that was really useful. And I think we can agree, guns = neutral, people = good/bad.

A firearm is only as accurate as the user wielding it. Accuracy is not really an issue when you're using it at targets that are 20 feet or less away from you. Sure anyone can pick up a gun and shoot one, but to shoot one well and have the know how on what to do if something goes wrong takes training and experience.

For example, there are a large number of factors that equate to ones accuracy with a rifle.

Breathing, trigger pull, heart rate, postures, grip pressure, cheek weld and of course, the firearm itself and the caliber being fired. Criminals such as the colorado shooter don't go around committing crimes caring about how "accurate" a weapon is, in fact, it's due to the fact that the AR15 he was using jammed and him not knowing how to fix it is what saved many more lives.

The bigger picture here is that studies have shown that even when the assault weapons ban was in affect, it had absolutely ZERO affect on gun related crimes.

In fact, the city with the strictest of gun laws, Chicago Illinois, is currently the murder capital of the country for violent gun related crimes, yet by the activists logic, having guns increases the chance of such crimes. How is it possible then that states like Utah, Texas, and Arizona have the lowest gun related crime rates in the entire country? Especially Arizona which has some of the most lenient gun laws in the country, is the poster child of having the lowest of all gun related crimes in the country.

No matter what you do, guns will ALWAYS be a factor for the bad guys, look at what prohibition did for alcohol, did it control the problem? Not one bit, in fact, it created a market to be exploited by the criminals and helped establish the mobs in the states.

People refuse to take self accountability and blame the TOOLS that were used instead of looking at the bigger picture here, the individual and on a broader scope, society as a whole and how things have degraded to the point that people have become so angry that they feel the need to deal with it violently.

I'll pose this question onto ANY person who argues that guns are responsible for peoples deaths.

If a gun is responsible for killing people does that mean it's the pencils fault for me spelling words wrong and having grammatical errors? Do you blame the car for a man killing another person due to it letting him get behind the wheel drunk? Is it the spoons fault that if I eat too much junk food that I've become overweight?

Self accountability people, a gun is an inanimate object, it is completely inert until the human element is added to the equation and they PHYSICALLY point and pull that trigger. Without the human intent to do harm to another, a gun is a tool. A tool only becomes a weapon when it is used by a HUMAN in such a way to cause physical harm to another life form.

Of course this is way too complicated and requires way too much higher brain function for many of these jackasses to comprehend.

Artimise Flare wrote:

No matter what you do, guns will ALWAYS be a factor for the bad guys, look at what prohibition did for alcohol, did it control the problem? Not one bit, in fact, it created a market to be exploited by the criminals and helped establish the mobs in the states.

The same could be said about the war on drugs.

I am obviously a believer in our 2nd amendment right to carry firearms to protect ourselves, but I don't really believe in open carry. For one thing, it makes you the first target in any situations where you might have to defend yourself, and because of that I believe that the aggressor should not know that you are armed to give you the advantage, because in a gunfight you need every advantage that you can get to make sure that you're the one that goes home.

From what I can tell this guy was carrying a .22 caliber GSG MP5 reproduction which for all intents and purposes is not a very good self defense weapon. I don't know why anyone would open carry a .22 caliber rifle for self defense. There are quite a few people who won't carry anything under 9mm let alone a .22 caliber firearm.

It's obvious that his goal was to carry a gun that would draw attention to himself so that he could get into a confrontation with the police that would allow him to show off his knowledge of his rights to open carry so that he could feel superior. Obviously that didn't work out the way he had planned because he ran into a police officer who also understood the laws regarding open carry.
GSG MP5