Are Guns Silencing Free Speech?

[nismaratwork]

Meh, okay. I can agree with this. I would argue that displaying a gun, alone, isn't very intimidating unless you're scared of guns. In which case, displaying anything that anyone is scared of has the same effect.

Do large poisonous spiders threaten free speech? What if its in a terrarium at the time? Personally, I'd feel more threatened by a guy with a box of bees than a guy carrying a revolver. Seriously.

I'm not afraid of guns, but I'm wary of people, and a gun gives a person the potential to act quickly and lethally. I'm not afraid that cars are going to swerve into my lane... I'm worried that a person DRIVING a car is going to swerve into my lane.

If someone is displaying a gun in an everyday setting, I question the reasoning on every level: to me that makes me wary of the PERSON... the gun is just an indicator and a potentially lethal accessory.

I'll ask for a third time: can anyone think of a good reason, other than to project force or authority (outside of a show, range, or hunt) to carry openly rather than concealed, and back that up with data? If not, then you're carrying openly just because you CAN, and that's a bad reason to do ANYTHING with a gun in my view. Once again, wary of the person, and the gun is at the crux of it. Jared, being opposed to guns, would rather not interact with that person... I'd just make sure that I could get a fast draw.

Is EITHER a desirable reaction?

edit: If someone say, tries to rob you with bees, or a snake, or dog... it's assault with a lethal weapon. You're not the first person to consider improvised weapons: remember, it's a crime just to use a REPLICA of a gun in the commission of a felony. Your examples are all crimes to assault someone with, and crimes to transport in an unsafe manner... and to own without a license in some states (venomous reptiles, lethal spiders, etc).

So yeah, if I'm walking down the street and some guy is an apiarist's suit with a bee-box?... I'm out of there, and on the phone with 911! If I'm in a rural community, or the suburbs, I'd assume that person kept bees and be unconcerned. Context. There are limited contexts for the display of a gun:

Authority by implied right to use force.
Naked Threat.
Using the gun for its intended purpose.
Necessity (The body or gun are not compatible with concealment)

I'm yet to hear any good arguments from necessity.

 

[nismaratwork]

I think you are scared of guns. Because you seem to have this reaction only when you see a gun. If a man is carrying concealed, you seem to completely ignore the possibility that that man can carry and be very willing to use it. The reasing factor of the behavior doesn't seem to be the willingness of the man who use a weapon, but the sight of the weapon itself. The fear drives you into an emotional judgment over the person who is carrying.

I'm not BAD at noting when someone is carrying concealed, but if it's the right gun on the right person... you're just unaware without training that only LEO's and a few others need or get. Naturally you can't be afraid of something which is hidden from you, which is good... a gun is a tool to defend, not a means to project force or threat in this society... unless you're a LEO.

 

[DanP]

which is good... a gun is a tool to defend, not a means to project force or threat in this society... unless you're a LEO.

Are you saying that LEOs projects threats into the society ?

 

[JaredJames]

Are you saying that LEOs projects threats into the society ?

I think he was going for "project force" on that one.

 

[nismaratwork]

Are you saying that LEOs projects threats into the society ?

Wow... everything I said, the reasonable questions I've asked, and you hang on this? No Dan, they'd be projecting authority: a gun is part of their uniform, like a bobby's baton (tonfa?) and it tells us from an early age that these are a select group who are authorized to use force when needed, including lethal force. Don't bother trying to make this somehow about me being "anti-cop"... I'm not. I'd add, LEOs OTHER than uniformed police or raiding team for other agencies carry openly! Even in the latter case, usually the pistol is concealed, and a sub-machine gun, assault rifle, or shotgun is used instead.

So... do you have an answer to my main question, or is that non-scrap of minutiae it?

Q:

I'll ask for a third time: can anyone think of a good reason, other than to project force or authority (outside of a show, range, or hunt) to carry openly rather than concealed, and back that up with data? If not, then you're carrying openly just because you CAN, and that's a bad reason to do ANYTHING with a gun in my view. Once again, wary of the person, and the gun is at the crux of it. Jared, being opposed to guns, would rather not interact with that person... I'd just make sure that I could get a fast draw.

Now waiting for 'A:'...

 

[nismaratwork]

I think he was going for "project force" on that one.

Thanks for not assuming the worst.

 

[JaredJames]

Thanks for not assuming the worst.

What I assumed and the conclusion I decided to stick with may not be the same thing.

 

[FlexGunship]

Now waiting for 'A:'...

Fine, since no one else can handle it; I'll take it on!

Open carrying indicates a desire to be upfront with the equipment you carry. Someone who carries openly is not ashamed of their firearm-carrying status. Carry the exact same analog to large axes.

Furthermore, if you are in line at a bank and a potential robber sees the gun (i.e. not concealed) he would probably be less likely to assume his bank robbery is a "sure thing."

Is that an extreme case? Sure. But if there's one potential idea, there could be many more.

Additionally, open carry raises a lot fewer questions than concealed carry.I just saw a guy with a handgun in a grocery store maybe two weeks ago. Openly carrying it on his hip with his jacket hung over it slightly. Now, if I had spotted it be luck because it was concealed, I would probably be more likely to question the situation.

Try assuming everyone is carrying a handgun for a day and imagine that everyone knows you're carrying a handgun. It's not that bad.

 

[JaredJames]

Furthermore, if you are in line at a bank and a potential robber sees the gun (i.e. not concealed) he would probably be less likely to assume his bank robbery is a "sure thing."

Is that an extreme case? Sure. But if there's one potential idea, there could be many more.

Could an opportunist try to get the gun and use it for the robbery? Would it simply mean you're the first to be shot / targeted in order to remove the threat you pose to the robbery? Perhaps they'd just wait until you leave?

Some are more extreme than others, but they're all certainly in the potential idea area.

I'd be interested in seeing a statistic showing crime against people openly carrying vs concealed carry vs no firearm.

Knowing someone has a firearm has a psychological effect on people. In my case it concerns me. If concealed and I don't know, the threat might be the same but the psychological effect (the stress even) isn't there and so doesn't stop me speaking freely.

 

[FlexGunship]

Could an opportunist try to get the gun and use it for the robbery? Would it simply mean you're the first to be shot / targeted in order to remove the threat you pose to the robbery? Perhaps they'd just wait until you leave?

Some are more extreme than others, but they're all certainly in the potential idea area.

I'd be interested in seeing a statistic showing crime against people openly carrying vs concealed carry vs no firearm.

I'd be interested in that statistic as well. However, in general, I think most robberies are carried out in the quest for "easy money." The idea that, instead of money, you could end up murdering someone or end up dead yourself seems like a strong counterpoint to the "easy money" idea. The bank heists of movie-lore are super rare if they even exist at all.

Knowing someone has a firearm has a psychological effect on people. In my case it concerns me. If concealed and I don't know, the threat might be the same but the psychological effect (the stress even) isn't there and so doesn't stop me speaking freely.

Fair enough. I guess if you haven't been around guns much they might seem a little pseudo-mystical and scary. I mean, I have a totally irrational fear of bees! Who am I to talk about what you should and shouldn't be scared of.

However, in line with the OP's question, I think it's a choice if you want to be intimidated out of your right to free speech by the sight of a gun or not.

 

[nismaratwork]

Fine, since no one else can handle it; I'll take it on!

Open carrying indicates a desire to be upfront with the equipment you carry. Someone who carries openly is not ashamed of their firearm-carrying status. Carry the exact same analog to large axes.

Furthermore, if you are in line at a bank and a potential robber sees the gun (i.e. not concealed) he would probably be less likely to assume his bank robbery is a "sure thing."

Is that an extreme case? Sure. But if there's one potential idea, there could be many more.

Additionally, open carry raises a lot fewer questions than concealed carry.I just saw a guy with a handgun in a grocery store maybe two weeks ago. Openly carrying it on his hip with his jacket hung over it slightly. Now, if I had spotted it be luck because it was concealed, I would probably be more likely to question the situation.

Try assuming everyone is carrying a handgun for a day and imagine that everyone knows you're carrying a handgun. It's not that bad.

I have to say, I never saw the concept of carrying concealed as a sing of shame, just good sense. The element of surprise is valuable. If someone is about to commit federal crimes by robbing a bank with a weapon, they'll probably be amped on adrenaline (at LEAST) and would assume I'm a cop. I HOPE they'd just club me, and not shoot me as their way of getting attention. Honestly, I don't know if these stats exist... I'm guessing that carrying openly in a bank is relatively rare, and bank robberies are (per capita) relatively rare.

A gun probably deter as well, but one thing it is CERTAIN to do: a gun makes any conflict potentially lethal. A gun escalates any conflict past every other point (even maiming) and takes it to death when it's taken out. It's true that simply displaying a gun isn't the same as brandishing it or drawing it, but it IS the next best thing.

By the way, I'm familiar with what it's like when everyone has guns, and I think you are too: it's called war, and it's not safe or that good. If you're in a culture where guns are part of survival, then you don't need a pistol, you need a good rifle, and this is all moot.

You should check out the dueling history of the Musketeers (the real ones, not 'Le Trois'... they're not a bad lesson in how you might expect, in such a universally armed society, to see elite groups emerge. Japanese history under the Tokugawa Shogunate is a similar lesson in how universally and openly armed groups interacted... and I might add, the end result was conquest by a new type of arm: guns, during the Meiji Revolution.

In fact, if you just armed everyone and they carried openly, your skill with firearms would become central to your survival, while the jobs for anyone who can kill by stealthy means would just skyrocket. You can't beat human nature...

Anyway, if I spotted someone with a gun (non-LEO) concealed or out, I'm taking note of that person and my own armament. I wouldn't become alarmed, just aware, unless their behaviour and appearance warranted further alarm.

 

[FlexGunship]

By the way, I'm familiar with what it's like when everyone has guns, and I think you are too: it's called war, and it's not safe or that good. If you're in a culture where guns are part of survival, then you don't need a pistol, you need a good rifle, and this is all moot.

Okay, this is a disgusting debasement of the conversation and you know it. A society in which every person is capable of using deadly force to defend his or her life is fundamentally distinct from war.

War requires a socio-economic engine for sustaining conflict.

The simple presence of guns is no such engine.

Not every situation in which everyone is eating a hot dog is an eating contest. And not every situation where everyone has a gun is a war!

Look up the statistics on gun-show shootings.

 

[nismaratwork]

I'd be interested in that statistic as well. However, in general, I think most robberies are carried out in the quest for "easy money." The idea that, instead of money, you could end up murdering someone or end up dead yourself seems like a strong counterpoint to the "easy money" idea. The bank heists of movie-lore are super rare if they even exist at all.



Fair enough. I guess if you haven't been around guns much they might seem a little pseudo-mystical and scary. I mean, I have a totally irrational fear of bees! Who am I to talk about what you should and shouldn't be scared of.

However, in line with the OP's question, I think it's a choice if you want to be intimidated out of your right to free speech by the sight of a gun or not.

Guns aren't mystical, sure, but they represent the most commonly seen article of a new age of devastating weapons: (rockets, bombs, missiles). A sword has changed its form in some ways, but from the Kilij to the Rapier, you cut, you slash, and there's the factor of human exhaustion. Modern weaponry, including guns, represents the ability of someone who is minimally skilled to harm a large number in seconds, in a way that is far more difficult to achieve otherwise.

People have had the same kind of horror when bows began to emerge, then mounted horsemen (mongols), English Longbows, and then the crossbow!... oh the crossbow, which indeed was the hot-button issue of its day. Here was a weapon that, in the hands of a peasant, could slay a knight in full armor from a distance. You bet your sweet bippy it was seen as threatening, and after attempted bans failed, regulation set it. It began with recurved bows, then English Longbows, but the Crossbow really finished the job. Guns have more in common with a crossbow than a bomb, in terms of social impact.

 

[nismaratwork]

Okay, this is a disgusting debasement of the conversation and you know it. A society in which every person is capable of using deadly force to defend his or her life is fundamentally distinct from war.

War requires a socio-economic engine for sustaining conflict.

The simple presence of guns is no such engine.

No it isn't, but in the modern world that we DO live in, what country is so armed and enjoys anything we'd call peace?

Honestly, you've never been able to gauge the mood of a country, or even a region, by who is carrying what openly? I see two police, one with a shotgun, and the other with an assault rifle guarding a bank, I've learned a LOT about where I am. If everyone has pistols on their hips... well... I think I'd believe I'd gone to the fictional old west. There has never been a time where we had these kind of modern weapons that are feasible to CARRY while you do something unrelated to toting that gun.

 

[nismaratwork]

<SNIP>Not every situation in which everyone is eating a hot dog is an eating contest. And not every situation where everyone has a gun is a war!

Look up the statistics on gun-show shootings.

To respond to your latter point, a gun show is NOT "carrying openly"... it's a GUN SHOW. I'm not worried if I see someone in full plate armor and sword either... if I'm taking my niece to a Renaissance fair.

We're talking about EVERYBODY carrying openly, not a concentration of people (mostly) interested in a hobby.

 

[FlexGunship]

To respond to your latter point, a gun show is NOT "carrying openly"... it's a GUN SHOW. I'm not worried if I see someone in full plate armor and sword either... if I'm taking my niece to a Renaissance fair.

We're talking about EVERYBODY carrying openly, not a concentration of people (mostly) interested in a hobby.

I think you might have just grazed my point and not really hit it. Yet, I assure you, people don't "check their guns at the door" at any gun show around here! True, they usually must be unloaded (so as not to be confused with show items). But I'll drop it.

 

[FlexGunship]

No it isn't, but in the modern world that we DO live in, what country is so armed and enjoys anything we'd call peace?

Honestly, you've never been able to gauge the mood of a country, or even a region, by who is carrying what openly? I see two police, one with a shotgun, and the other with an assault rifle guarding a bank, I've learned a LOT about where I am. If everyone has pistols on their hips... well... I think I'd believe I'd gone to the fictional old west. There has never been a time where we had these kind of modern weapons that are feasible to CARRY while you do something unrelated to toting that gun.

I'm getting your point, but you're using examples to cite some sort of relationship. You've got the relationship backwards. When everyone is carrying guns, it doesn't mean it's a warzone. However, when you are in a warzone, there's a good chance everyone will be carrying a gun.

This reversal of cause-and-effect that you are working on is exactly why I cited "gun shows" as a counterpoint. Warzones invite guns... guns don't invite warzones.

 

[DanP]

not a concentration of people (mostly) interested in a hobby.

Yeah, guns are nice as collectibles as well. Humans collected arms for display since a long time.

Whats not to like in such marvels like this one ?

 

[nismaratwork]

I think you might have just grazed my point and not really hit it. Yet, I assure you, people don't "check their guns at the door" at any gun show around here! True, they usually must be unloaded (so as not to be confused with show items). But I'll drop it.

I mean people carrying as a rule, as a matter of course, in GENERAL society... not a group of gun enthusiasts. I've BEEN to gun shows, and it's like any "con"... it's fun, it's peppy, and it's full of people with a similar interest. This is NOT a fair example of normal gun behaviour, period, it's the exception.

 

[JaredJames]

Fair enough. I guess if you haven't been around guns much they might seem a little pseudo-mystical and scary. I mean, I have a totally irrational fear of bees! Who am I to talk about what you should and shouldn't be scared of.

Again, it's not the gun itself I'm concerned with. It's the person with it.

There's nothing about a gun that amazes / mystifies me. It's purely my concern that there's a person willing to take a life stood opposite me along with the means to do so. That's what puts me on edge.

A gun randomly on the table in front of me wouldn't even get a reaction (well, nothing more than me doing a few 007 impressions in the mirror).

 

[nismaratwork]

I'm getting your point, but you're using examples to cite some sort of relationship. You've got the relationship backwards. When everyone is carrying guns, it doesn't mean it's a warzone. However, when you are in a warzone, there's a good chance everyone will be carrying a gun.

This reversal of cause-and-effect that you are working on is exactly why I cited "gun shows" as a counterpoint. Warzones invite guns... guns don't invite warzones.

OK, my view on guns is really clear (ask jarednjames if you need confirmation): I like guns. I LOVE to target shoot. I carry concealed for self defense.


Cause... no, but it's a telling symptom once everyone is carrying a gun. Why should people in this country imitate behaviour that we need a warzone or gun-con to cite? I'm not being anti-gun, I think this is common-sense stuff.


I do want to be REALLY clear however: yeah, everyone in Afghanistan might have an AK-47, but they hardly need to fight as their history makes clear. By the same token, what does it say about a culture that imitates a warzone as a statement? We don't duel anymore, we don't need to display our arms to defend ourselves... I'm just at a loss: why carry openly in everyday life? At a gun show... no problem, just like a range.

 

[nismaratwork]

Yeah, nice as collectibles as well. Humans collected arms for a long time.

Whats not to like?

Wow... when I edit your post to the point of absurdity, it IS just the way you take a part of a sentence form my posts.

*Obviously the "quoted" post is not an accurate quote. This is satire, for those who are tone-deaf.

Dan, if you want to talk, and follow even the basic forum guidelines around quoting... great. Otherwise, why are you here?

 

[DanP]

There's nothing about a gun that amazes / mystifies me. It's purely my concern that there's a person willing to take a life stood opposite me along with the means to do so. That's what puts me on edge.

.

Its not rational. Its not rational to believe that only persons who open carry are willing to take a life. Its also irrational to think that a person who doesn't carry any weapon is not willing to take a life. Or that persons who open carry would do it in anything but extreme conditions and in a law sanctioned way. What do you think about someone who is carrying concealed and has a suppressor on his weapon ? Id be more worried to detect a concealed weapon with a suppressor than a ballroom full of blokes who open carry. I think it's in your mind. You are not comfortable with the weapon, so you see in everyone which carries a threat.

 

[JaredJames]

Its not rational to believe that only persons who open carry are willing to take a life.

I never said that.

Its also irrrational to think that a person who doesn't carry any weapon is not willing to take a life.

Never said I think that.

You are not comfortable with the weapon, so you see in everyone which carries a threat.

It's irrational to see a person with a gun as a potential threat to you?

Or that persons who open carry would do it in anything but extreme conditions and in a law sanctioned way.

I never said that.

 

[DanP]

I never said that.


Never said I think that.



I never said that.

Then why do you fear a gun in sight ?

It's irrational to see a person with a gun as a potential threat to you?

Kinda yes, because it depends of the situation. In the vast majority of cases, a person with a gun is not a threat to you.

 

[JaredJames]

Then why do you fear a gun in sight ?

I'm not explaining it for a fourth time. It's not the gun that gets me.

Kinda yes, because it depends of the situation. In the vast majority of cases, a person with a gun is not a threat to you.

You're ignoring 'potential'.

 

[FlexGunship]

I'm just at a loss: why carry openly in everyday life?

I know we're not talking about gun control. Forgive the cliche and please forgive the hyperbole, but, seriously...

 

[DanP]

I'm not explaining it for a fourth time. It's not the gun that gets me.

If its not the gun, why don't you fear everyone around you ? For everyone of them can be in theory a person willing to kill and with the means to do it, only that you can't see them.

You're ignoring 'potential'.

Look, do you recall Annie Hall movie ?

MOTHER
(To the doctor)
He's been depressed. All off a sudden,
he can't do anything.

DOCTOR
(Nodding)
Why are you depressed, Alvy?

MOTHER
(Nudging Alvy)
Tell Dr. Flicker.
(Young Alvy sits, his head down. His
mother answers for him)
It's something he read.

DOCTOR
(Puffing on his cigarette and
nodding)
Something he read, huh?

ALVY
(His head still down)
The universe is expanding.

DOCTOR
The universe is expanding?

ALVY
(Looking up at the doctor)
Well, the universe is everything, and if
it's expanding, someday it will break apart
and that would be the end of everything!

Disgusted, his mother looks at him.

MOTHER
(shouting)
What is that your business?
(she turns back to the doctor)
He stopped doing his homework.

ALVY
What's the point?

MOTHER
(Excited, gesturing with her hands)
What has the universe got to do with it?
You're here in Brooklyn! Brooklyn is not
expanding!

 

[nismaratwork]

Jared... don't feed him. We're talking about someone who doesn't see a gun as a threat... fair enough. "Egy [*ember] beledobja a kútba a követ, száz okos." Don't waste the effort trying to collect stones.

Original is: Egy bolond beledobja a kútba a követ, száz okos, but that would be unfair.

 

[DanP]

J. "Egy [*ember] beledobja a kútba a követ, száz okos." Don't waste the effort trying to collect stones.

Original is: Egy bolond beledobja a kútba a követ, száz okos, but that would be unfair.

I am speaking Hungarian man :P You forgot "... se veszi ki " You know, the action that the 100 geniuses can't do :P