Wimps.

There's no reason whatsoever to open carry handguns or rifles at neighborhood family events.

things such as,

All firearms transaction go through an FFL dealer, NO EXCEPTIONS.
Stiffer penalties for straw purchases
Stiffer penalties for crimes involving firearms
Better reporting by states to the NICS of prohibited persons
More stringent national standards for CCP
More funding for Mental Health Care
End the insane WOD which would help reduce violence in the inner cities
Repeal the Tiahart Amendment
Confirm a permanent BATFE director
Better funding for the BATFE
Those are just a few.

I don't know what the others are.

Sorry about that,
End the insane War On Drugs
Tiahart Amendment limited the Bureau of Alcohol Tabbaco Firearms and Explosives on how many inspections a year they could do on FFL dealers.
Confirm a permanent director for the Bureau of Alcohol Tabacco Firearms and Explosives
More funding for the Bureau of Alcohol Tabbaco Firearms and Explosives.

How about ending the ban on research into and documentation of guns?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023045482

and I fully agree that the CDC should be allowed to do research on the effects of violence of firearms on society, but, it has to be fair and unbiased research.

and we're not talking just about the CDC. All major science and public health research in the US is funded by the federal government. NIH and NSF need to be able to fund academic research into guns. Grant applications are subject to rigorous and competitive review processes. The research is then done according to careful standards, since federal funding guidelines require it, and then journals insist on peer review before allowing publication.

I told you that we probably had more in common than we realized on gun control.
I want to apologize to you for getting nasty in other threads, this issue is very contentious and can inflame passions.
I'll try to avoid the insults and have a respectful debate from now on, I may not agree with you on some comments, but there's no reason we can't have a civil discussion.

Anywho, it's 10:45 here, I think that you're 2 hours ahead of Nevada, so, you have a good night and will get back to you tomorrow.

Sleep well.

it was an in your face action which does nothing but make gun owners look bad.

that drove them "batshit crazy".

seem to have been particularly agitating for them.

Pretty funny isn't it. I'm glad they canceled, but that explanation is a riot. Typical too. We're not supposed to be intimidated by a bunch of armed people in the streets, but they are intimidated by a bullhorn?!

To me, this was just fanning the flames.

Now they are too afraid to go out, even with their guns! sheesh. I guess they can cower in a bunker.

Seems these morans have manhood issues.

you gotta fucking gun and the 'anti-gun zealots' are intimidating you?

What a bunch of fucking wimps.

But then we knew that, din't we??

More guns!!!!1111

Was your vote in that poll on CC serious?

That was the closest option you had to a full ban. I own two and would have to give them up.

but the correct choice. If there is the potential for confrontation- avoid it

Not just irony, but really funny. Still, I'm not inclined to ridicule them because I'm glad they made the right decision. We're talking about my city here.

someone with a open carry weapon stand legally, just curious?

No difference between them if either carried legally.

and depending of disparity of force the open carry person could be justified in using lethal force.

So i will try another answer, if you attack someone open carrying legally then they if they feel fear of death or serious injury can stop that threat. You have no right to attack someone just because they are doing something legal you dont like.

That would depend upon the disparity of force between the two of you. If you are a young, fit, man and the gun wearer is a senior citizen, he can likely shoot you - legally.

Initiating violence is always a bad idea.

By telling them what they think? Gosh. Minnesota surely should bring back the death penalty for that.

They would have been going into a situation in which a confrontation and hot tempers would be a possibility. That is something at an armed person should avoid. A large part of my CHL class was on the importance of avoiding situations that could lead to angry conflict.

Carry concealed, and nobody gets upset that you have a gun.

I carry a glock and a baby glock on an ankle holster most days and unless you look real carefully you would never notice either. The majority of the freaking out over stuff like this is the extremists on both ends of the argument with the middle mot caring.

They all need to go.