First Amendment Areas.

[lockedout]

I see it more as bringing them as a deterrent to possible government over reaching. But I wasn't there so I can't say obviously.

I simply compare it to myself. I carry a weapon every day, every where I go (except to work, dem gun free zones) and I pray I never have to use it. But I find that more often then not, simply showing you have a weapon will stop most aggressive behavior.

I think people don't understand. Yes they brought guns with them just as they would have brought guns with them if they were going anywhere else. People that legally carry will always be carrying, unless like twonine said, gun free zones.

- - - Updated - - -

. Both views are stupid.

Only your view is smart right?

- - - Updated - - -

How is it wrong though? That's the part I don't understand.

People these days are so afraid of other people simply carrying guns that it amazes me. Carrying a weapon in and of itself isn't offensive or threatening. Nor is it wrong.

Police carry weapons all the time and I don't feel threatened by them. I know it is simply a tool for self defense should they need it.

But like I said before I must be different then the majority of the people out there because of this particular view. To each their own.

I wish all my neighbors had at least a gun in there house for self defense, but I know they don't. People are conditioned nowadays that police carrying a gun is ok but anyone else isn't. I am more scared of a cop with a gun then my neighbor.

[belfpala]

I think people don't understand. Yes they brought guns with them just as they would have brought guns with them if they were going anywhere else. People that legally carry will always be carrying, unless like twonine said, gun free zones.

The guns aren't at issue here. Not even I'm complaining about that, and you probably know my stance on guns.

The issue is intent plus the guns.

[Orbitus]

I think people don't understand. Yes they brought guns with them just as they would have brought guns with them if they were going anywhere else. People that legally carry will always be carrying, unless like twonine said, gun free zones.

- - - Updated - - -



Only your view is smart right?

- - - Updated - - -



I wish all my neighbors had at least a gun in there house for self defense, but I know they don't. People are conditioned nowadays that police carrying a gun is ok but anyone else isn't. I am more scared of a cop with a gun then my neighbor.

I am still waiting for you to show me where Bundy has any claim to this land he has been using without his so called ancestral right.

Also when you bring guns to a protest of any sort you are then given extra attention. And then you go from peaceful protesters to protesters trying to push something on someone else. A gun is a force multiplier to a situation these idiots shouldn't even have been invited to.

Not to mention, do these people have Nevada licenses? Because taking a firearm across state lines can get you arrested unless you have a concealed carry permit for that state.

[TwoNineMarine]

I am still waiting for you to show me where Bundy has any claim to this land he has been using without his so called ancestral right.

Also when you bring guns to a protest of any sort you are then given extra attention. And then you go from peaceful protesters to protesters trying to push something on someone else. A gun is a force multiplier to a situation these idiots shouldn't even have been invited to.

Not to mention, do these people have Nevada licenses? Because taking a firearm across state lines can get you arrested unless you have a concealed carry permit for that state.

Is Nevada an open carry state? The only times I've ever been to Nevada have been to get hammered in Vegas an Laughton so idk lol

[belfpala]

Is Nevada an open carry state? The only times I've ever been to Nevada have been to get hammered in Vegas an Laughton so idk lol

Just at brief glance, open carry is allowed. Permit required for a handgun. I think what orbitus might mean is that taking a weapon across state lines with intent to use it can be a crime.

[TwoNineMarine]

Just at brief glance, open carry is allowed. Permit required for a handgun. I think what orbitus might mean is that taking a weapon across state lines with intent to use it can be a crime.

Roger that.

[Orbitus]

Is Nevada an open carry state? The only times I've ever been to Nevada have been to get hammered in Vegas an Laughton so idk lol

If you have seen the videos in this thread about this whole ordeal, most of the people with the rifles of various calibers also have handguns. In the last video I posted from the local channel 8, the one guy saying he was standing up for his freedom had a handgun on his back. I am willing to bet most of them do not have Nevada permits for their guns.

[Xeones]

I see it more as bringing them as a deterrent to possible government over reaching. But I wasn't there so I can't say obviously.

I simply compare it to myself. I carry a weapon every day, every where I go (except to work, dem gun free zones) and I pray I never have to use it. But I find that more often then not, simply showing you have a weapon will stop most aggressive behavior.

They are nut jobs for feeling they had to use weapons to defend against a government over reach. We have a legislative branch of government for a reason, what purpose does it serve if any time the government does anything we just call up a posse with guns to push them away? You keep trying to use some twisted logic to make a statement that has no grounds to stand on. These people were spoiling for a fight, this is just short of a rebellion over some jerk being in the wrong.

[Felya]

The guns aren't at issue here. Not even I'm complaining about that, and you probably know my stance on guns.

The issue is intent plus the guns.

Guns are weapons, simple as that. This is the place where one can claim that guns are no different than a knife or crow bar. It's bringing weapons. If they brought a 4x4 wrapped in barb wire, it would be the same as guns. They didn't bring them to build a tent, or gut a fish. The same reason weapons scare off intruders, is the same reasons weapons scare people who are not intruders. Weapons mean violence... It's why they scare people...

[TwoNineMarine]

They are nut jobs for feeling they had to use weapons to defend against a government over reach. We have a legislative branch of government for a reason, what purpose does it serve if any time the government does anything we just call up a posse with guns to push them away? You keep trying to use some twisted logic to make a statement that has no grounds to stand on. These people were spoiling for a fight, this is just short of a rebellion over some jerk being in the wrong.

You don't seem to understand that I never said they were right.

I've been trying to convey that the weapons make no difference to the situation. (in my opinion of course) Obviously people disagree with me.

And this isn't the best example obviously but I am all for standing up against your government if they are doing something wrong. That's how we keep them in check (which is what members of a country are supposed to do).

Because lets face it. History has proven that governments are not to be trusted. Not entirely that is. There is always going to be someone who wants more power, more control. And generally they will make that happen by any means possible.

[Xeones]

You don't seem to understand that I never said they were right.

I've been trying to convey that the weapons make no difference to the situation. (in my opinion of course) Obviously people disagree with me.

And this isn't the best example obviously but I am all for standing up against your government if they are doing something wrong. That's how we keep them in check (which is what members of a country are supposed to do).

Because lets face it. History has proven that governments are not to be trusted. Not entirely that is. There is always going to be someone who wants more power, more control. And generally they will make that happen by any means possible.

I don't see how a rational person can say the weapons make no difference. They brought those guns to threaten, and if need be kill. That is a massive difference between coming unarmed to exercise free speech. They were pointing guns and federal agents FFS!

You stand up to the government when they are doing something wrong, but is that your first response for a situation you don't understand? They weren't keeping the government in check, what they did was done for no reason.

Just because governments are can be bad doesn't mean shooting federal officials becomes your first course of action. Trust of the government has nothing to do here, these were sick people under a delusion which are terrifying. This entire situation is so scary because these people were so ready to take up arms against the government with zero provocation. I'm in michigan so I still have that militia group that was plotting attacks on people a few years back in the back of my mind. There are sick people in this country who are ready to kill people for no reason under the concept of "liberty" and we have people attempting to stand up for them. It boggles my mind that you can attempt to take the stance of such disturbed people.

[Cthulhu 2020]

They had contested the fees in court, twice I believe. They lost that argument. Among the many other things the government did to collect, it sounds like they tried all other options and Bundy left them no choice but to come and collect the debt.

When Bundy and friends showed up with guns and did everything just short of shooting federal officers, and federal officers backed off before any possible shots were fired, you KNOW someone there leading the operation saw that it was a high tension operation and the likelihood that a federal officer was going to be shot for doing his job was rising. They would not have backed off otherwise. No "Liberty won the day" or any crap like that. Intimidation made the feds back down.

Intent with the carrying of the guns was very clear.

[lockedout]

I am willing to bet most of them do not have Nevada permits for their guns.

Nevada recognizes permits from: Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho (enhanced permits), Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota (class 1 permits), Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia

[belfpala]

Nevada recognizes permits from: Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho (enhanced permits), Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota (class 1 permits), Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/us/nev...ttle-showdown/

"In the wake of the publicized protests, members of various militia groups have been traveling from Virginia, Texas, Montana, Idaho and Wisconsin and arriving at the protest site and Bundy's ranch to support the family, said Stephen L. Dean, 45, of Utah, a member of one such group called the Peoples United Mobile Armed Services."

I don't see any of those on your list.

[Orbitus]

Nevada recognizes permits from: Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho (enhanced permits), Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota (class 1 permits), Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia

Still waiting for the proof that Bundy owns the land he has been using.

[NoiseTank13]

Illegal immigrants breaking U.S law by crossing the border! Rally the militia and defend our laws!

Old white man breaking U.S law by refusing to pay taxes? Break 'em and fight the man!

[lockedout]

Still waiting for the proof that Bundy owns the land he has been using.

I can provide it but I am curious what happens when I do? Do you change your opinion or will it not matter?

[lockedout]

I don't see any of those on your list.

Then you would have to further study Nevada gun law. Those are the permits it recognizes, which are for conceal carry, I don't think you need a permit for open carry.

- - - Updated - - -

How are you going to prove a falsehood?

You are saying he had no grazing rights prior to 1993? What was he paying grazing fees for? The entire reason this is going on is because he refused the governments offer for his grazing rights in 1993. He stayed on the land when everyone else had no choice but to accept the governments offer for their grazing rights. Now I never said he owned the property I said he owned the rights.

- - - Updated - - -

Because taking a firearm across state lines can get you arrested unless you have a concealed carry permit for that state.

Unless you aren't conceal carrying and open carrying instead.

[Garnier Fructis]

You are saying he had no grazing rights prior to 1993? What was he paying grazing fees for? The entire reason this is going on is because he refused the governments offer for his grazing rights in 1993. He stayed on the land when everyone else had no choice but to accept the governments offer for their grazing rights. Now I never said he owned the property I said he owned the rights.

You kind of implied that already:

Still waiting for the proof that Bundy owns the land he has been using.

I can provide it but I am curious what happens when I do? Do you change your opinion or will it not matter?

[lockedout]

You kind of implied that already:

No I said he owns the rights to the land. Show me where I said he owns the land.