Why Are Gun Owners So Lawful?

Uncle posted this video

have a look. A reporter is investigating some shady stuff, and they do the typical park-the-news-truck and knock on the door with the camera crew. Generally it amounts to nothing, but on rare occasions it results in a HUGE scoop making it well worth it.

Looks like the occupants did the smart thing and not answer the door…but on the way back to the truck it appears what they DID do is call their buddy who has more balls than brains.

He acts all tough and dumb and smacks around the Camera. When he realizes that the people are obviously smarter than him, not scared of his puffed up chest, and not complying with his incoherent commands he goes back to his truck and retrieves what appears to be a Hi-Point Pistol (stereotypes exist for a reason…I’m just sayin’) and holds it behind his back.

The crew retreats to the van and call the cops. (BTW under the “Stand Your Ground Law” they could justifiably shoot this jerk, and it would have been a wise move if you ask me, as things could have gotten VERY ugly VERY fast at this point), Jethro drives off.

Cops see the video, and surprise surprise, they know the fella, and arrest him on Felony assault.

Who knows if he legally had that gun, he won’t anymore or ever again, and will likely spend some time in jail for the attack.

Now let’s look at what transpired. He grabbed a gun, and held it behind his back. As far as I can see he didn’t point it, and certainly never fired a shot. He slapped a camera, something I suspect every newsie has experienced.

But that’s it, game over for his 2nd Amendment rights, and hello to gang showers in jail. For that. We don’t even know if the gun was loaded, or even if the POS worked! it didn’t have to be on either account. He could have got killed for that 100% legally, and he DID get thrown in jail on a felony rap.

Lawful gun owners don’t obey the law because we’re angels, we do it because the stakes are so high, and the cost is so great for a mistake like this. It takes a guy THAT stupid to do something like this.

That’s the point to be made.

Also carry your damn guns, because as you can see, things can go ugly fast!

This entry was posted in Guns, Politics, Safety, Self Defense. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Why Are Gun Owners So Lawful?

  1. Kristopher says:

    As I said to a commenter who tried to defend this tard on the newsie’s website … this is a member of Meth Family Robinson.

    They do stupid shit like this, when they aren’t stealing wire and plumbing out of people’s houses.

    If the weapon is more spendy than a hi-point, then it was probably stolen and unsellable due to an SS number engraved on it.

    The local laws did the right thing when they disarmed his drugged out ass and sent him to jail.

  2. Bob S. says:

    Lawful gun owners don’t obey the law because we’re angels, we do it because the stakes are so high, and the cost is so great for a mistake like this.

    We obey the law because it is the right thing to do; Not because there are consequences.

    I’ll accept the consequences of my behavior; good, neutral or bad, but my behavior is based on what is the right thing to do, not the lawful thing to do.

    I see that as a huge distinction but one that is practically moot because often the right thing to do is the lawful thing to do.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      I can only partly agree with you Bob. While I think overall you’re right, and I think any pro-rights activist will agree with you. People as a rule are good, and do good. That’s why we don’t mind liberal gun laws as there is so little harm, vs. so much good that can come from it.

      That being said every study that has been conducted of revocation of carry permits for unlawful behavior, the studies have never topped 2%, and generally find a number below 1% of total permit holders.

      Furthermore the community is FILLED with gunnies who DON’T respect laws on their face. I believe that Massachusetts’ gun laws are unjust…yet I follow them. I don’t follow them because “Its the Right Thing” I do it because the harm of resisting said laws is so great, and the laws themselves are not beyond our powers to repeal.

      Same goes with the TSA, it is NOT just, or RIGHT to comply with them. Not one bit. It WOULD be just to strike them defensively the moment they lay a hand on me, because no matter what the various charters say, they have no right to do what they do. Still they have the power to retaliate with arrests, incarceration, and revocation of my rights. So I comply and do what I do to change the unjust laws.

      Further I suspect there have to be more than 1% of gunnies who aren’t as morally bound as I am, but they are constrained by the same legal retaliation, and the stakes are high.

      I exceed the speed limit when I feel its safe and the risks are low, because I know that even if I’m caught the punishment will be one I can bear. I don’t carry where it is legally prohibited to do so because I cannot bear the punishment if I am caught, tho I have contempt for both laws.

      See where I’m going?

    • Jake says:

      We obey the law because it is the right thing to do; Not because there are consequences.

      Just out of curiosity, are you saying “obeying the law is the right thing to do” or “what the law requires is also the right thing to do”? The difference is critical, and not apparent from the particular wording you used.

      If you mean the first, I would simply point out that not only is obeying some laws wrong, disobeying certain laws is sometimes the only right thing to do. I direct you to Nazi Germany’s anti-semetic laws, or the pre Civil War laws of many northern states requiring the return of runaway slaves, as clear examples of a law that must be disobeyed.

      If you mean the second, well… you should actually take a look at the actual laws that are on the books. Most of them have absolutely nothing to do with right or wrong. Is it really wrong to import lobster tails from Honduras in plastic bags instead of cardboard boxes? No, but three Americans were sentenced to eight years in jail for it. Is it wrong to keep your guns if your soon-to-be-ex-wife files a baseless restraining order against you? No, but it is a federal and state felony. I could go on, and on.

      “Legal” and “right” have become dissociated.

      • “Legal” and “right” have become dissociated.

        I would argue that that is a feature, not a bug. Laws aren’t FOR regulating morality (right and wrong). They are for protecting the rights of the citizens (right to life, property, freedom from harm, etc). This extends to protecting the overall rights of the populace by protecting natural resources etc.

        Where things have become dissassociated is at the requirement that laws be REASONABLE. That’s why we have stupid laws that put people in jail for extended sentences for using the wrong container to transport lobsters.

        That’s not to say that the assholes in office (regardless of party) don’t try to write their personal moral codes into law, and often succeed. It’s just wrong for them to do so.

        s

  3. Dave S says:

    THAT is brandishing! Employing a lethal weapon when there is no threat to your life. Using a gun to intimidate people, to coerce someone, illegal. This stuff gets attention because it’s so rare.

  4. jimmie says:

    Why all the hate for hi-point? My son’s 9mm carbine works great and for $230 it was hundreds less then any other 9mm i could find. Also its simple enough to clean that he can do it by himself.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      No hate. I’m not a fan of them just because they’re big heavy and cheaply made, and while inexpensive, I find it overall difficult to contort a scenario where somebody can only get a Hi-Point in a world full of other cheap but slightly less cheap guns like Kel Tec, Bersa, and the derth of “Police Trade In” used guns.

      I have a friend who’s carry and HD gun is a Hi-Point. He could do a LOT better than that peice of potmetal, but also it beats the hell out of foul language.

      Also I judge the carbines on a MUCH different scale than the pistols. My samples are small, but overall the carbines are passable guns, while the pistols are below average.

      My big point is just the stereotype of Hi-Points being the preferred hand gun for idiots, inner city people, and trailer park white trash. I know lots of people who have high-end guns and acquired a Hi-Point just because it was cheap and they were interested in one. I myself have a Jennings for the same reason. I’m just repeating stereotypes, and noting that they exist for a reason.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>