The inevitable Singles Forum Open Carry (guns) poll.. :p

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Should Open Carry weapons in public be allowed (MULT. CHOICE ALLOWED)

  • YES

    Votes: 8 44.4%
  • NO

    Votes: 4 22.2%
  • Not Sure

    Votes: 2 11.1%
  • Other (please explain)

    Votes: 3 16.7%
  • What is this world coming to!

    Votes: 2 11.1%

  • Total voters
    18
Aug 2, 2009
24,574
4,262
113
#1
You all knew this poll was coming right?? :rolleyes: It was just a question of when.. :p (Please wait 4 the poll)

So do you think private citizens should be allowed to carry guns visibly on their person in public? :)

Fun fact: this thread was inspired by my own crazy thought that if the folks in that bar massacre had open carry weapons on them, the shooter would either not have carried out his plans, or at least would have been shot dead long before he killed 49 people..


womanopencarry.jpg
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
41,243
16,252
113
69
Tennessee
#2
You all knew this poll was coming right?? :rolleyes: It was just a question of when.. :p (Please wait 4 the poll)

So do you think private citizens should be allowed to carry guns visibly on their person in public? :)

Fun fact: this thread was inspired by my own crazy thought that if the folks in that bar massacre had open carry weapons on them, the shooter would either not have carried out his plans, or at least would have been shot dead long before he killed 49 people..


View attachment 153151
The lady is getting irate over being gouged at the grocery store.
 

Lynx

Folksy yet erudite
Aug 13, 2014
24,799
8,103
113
#3
The wheel spins round again and this topic is once more to the fore.

Most of the people I know have the common sense necessary for me to be okay with them having a gun. And if they had them their very presence would keep the senseless ones I know in line. :p
 
May 22, 2006
88
2
8
#4
If you want to be a target, ambushed from behind, be taken out first before a crime is perpetrated, have your gun stolen at gunpoint, be followed to your house and have it broken into, your car broken into by people looking for weapons they can use to commit other crimes, by all means, open carry :)


If not, then you have the sense to know what having the element of surprise is all about :)

I prefer sensible people having guns. :cool:
 

BruceWayne

Senior Member
Aug 7, 2013
3,694
357
83
Gotham City
#5
If they weren't carrying them not in the open, would they carry them in the open? Most aren't going to carry a gun either way. Personally, I think it's a terrible idea lol. You could easily be disarmed. If someone does have poor intentions and they see you with your gun, guess who's getting shot first with no time to react? I would also think that you would naturally make people around you nervous if they saw you with one; I don't see how that's a positive thing. If I carry, I want it to be a surprise. I just think it's better and safer that way.
 
Last edited:
D

Donkeyfish07

Guest
#6
I am more of a fan of concealed carry. Its better to have potential enemies not know you are armed.
 

Pipp

Majestic Llamacorn
Sep 17, 2013
5,536
2,701
113
Georgia
#7
Same as Donkeybutt.... concealed is much smarter.
 

AsifinPassing

Senior Member
Jul 13, 2010
3,608
40
48
#8
I'm from Oklahoma, so...biased or stereotypical as this sounds, some of our biggest fashions for both men and women involve camouflage.



Anyway, I'm for it. Here's a long complicated explanation of why:



On the one hand, Jesus says that those who live by the sword die by the sword. He said we're suppose to bless our enemies (instead of returning their hatred), bless and not curse. God says in Deuteronomy that vengeance is His. He will repay.

I could keep going, but this illustrates the pacifist argument pretty well, and I totally understand and support this school of thought.

________"He's a little crazy, but I like him."________


...but on the other hand... those who are using firearms irresponsibly (robbing, murdering, etc) are not going to be any lessened or corrected by disarming those who do use their firearms appropriately. In the same way, look at all the shootings and terrorism talks cropping up.

If we had an armed populous, and a shooter shows up (or any type of ill intending individual), the number of casualties is likely to be considerably diminished.

"We're here to kill you."


"All my training has prepared me for this moment..."


 
M

MollyConnor

Guest
#9
I'm from Oklahoma, so...biased or stereotypical as this sounds, some of our biggest fashions for both men and women involve camouflage.



Anyway, I'm for it. Here's a long complicated explanation of why:


On the one hand, Jesus says that those who live by the sword die by the sword. He said we're suppose to bless our enemies (instead of returning their hatred), bless and not curse. God says in Deuteronomy that vengeance is His. He will repay.

I could keep going, but this illustrates the pacifist argument pretty well, and I totally understand and support this school of thought.

________"He's a little crazy, but I like him."________


...but on the other hand... those who are using firearms irresponsibly (robbing, murdering, etc) are not going to be any lessened or corrected by disarming those who do use their firearms appropriately. In the same way, look at all the shootings and terrorism talks cropping up.

If we had an armed populous, and a shooter shows up (or any type of ill intending individual), the number of casualties is likely to be considerably diminished.

"We're here to kill you."


"All my training has prepared me for this moment..."


Is that Willy Wonka?
 
J

JustWhoIAm

Guest
#10
I'm from Oklahoma, so...biased or stereotypical as this sounds, some of our biggest fashions for both men and women involve camouflage.



Anyway, I'm for it. Here's a long complicated explanation of why:



On the one hand, Jesus says that those who live by the sword die by the sword. He said we're suppose to bless our enemies (instead of returning their hatred), bless and not curse. God says in Deuteronomy that vengeance is His. He will repay.

I could keep going, but this illustrates the pacifist argument pretty well, and I totally understand and support this school of thought.

________"He's a little crazy, but I like him."________


...but on the other hand... those who are using firearms irresponsibly (robbing, murdering, etc) are not going to be any lessened or corrected by disarming those who do use their firearms appropriately. In the same way, look at all the shootings and terrorism talks cropping up.

If we had an armed populous, and a shooter shows up (or any type of ill intending individual), the number of casualties is likely to be considerably diminished.

"We're here to kill you."


"All my training has prepared me for this moment..."


God's people had a military in the bible for a reason. He guided them in battle many, many times for his purposes.

If defending one's family or neighborhood from those with harmful intent isn't righteous cause to bear arms, i really don't know what would be.

Jesus was no pacifist. He just knew when the right time was to start flipping tables and kicking some behind.
 

AsifinPassing

Senior Member
Jul 13, 2010
3,608
40
48
#11
God's people had a military in the bible for a reason. He guided them in battle many, many times for his purposes.

If defending one's family or neighborhood from those with harmful intent isn't righteous cause to bear arms, i really don't know what would be.

Jesus was no pacifist. He just knew when the right time was to start flipping tables and kicking some behind.
I don't know that I'd use the temple scene to illustrate not being a pacifist. More like the scene in revelation where He comes down from Heaven soaked in blood... but in any case, He is trying to strive for peace above everything else. "God desires mercy, not sacrifice." Remember? The problem is, there are (actually many) people opposed to God. Isaiah 59 talks about how the feet of the wicked are swift to shed blood, so that should always be our last resort.

Nonetheless, there is a time and a place for everything. War doesn't have to exist if we all chose not to kill one another. The problem is, we do choose that.

So, I wanted to illustrate in my original post that I understand both Gandhi's way of fighting that reality, and the NRA's way of fighting that reality. Both ways of thinking have strengths and weaknesses.
 

Lynx

Folksy yet erudite
Aug 13, 2014
24,799
8,103
113
#12
So, I wanted to illustrate in my original post that I understand both Gandhi's way of fighting that reality, and the NRA's way of fighting that reality. Both ways of thinking have strengths and weaknesses.
Instead of strengths and weaknesses, I would say both have their seasons. There is valid reason for each way of thinking, and they are not mutually exclusive. The weaknesses come when either is taken to an extreme.
 

cinder

Senior Member
Mar 26, 2014
4,327
2,359
113
#14
Why does this question feel like asking whether you would be eaten by wild lions or pet dogs? While i realize they don't make the news, I haven't seen or heard many credible stories about regular everyday armed citizens preventing mass shootings or other crimes because they had their gun with them. So for the decent responsible people, is being able to own a gun much more than a security blanket mentality of well, if something bad happens at least I have the power to do something?

The biggest problem I see with carrying guns around during everyday life (people have all sorts of hobbies, but the right to go hunting or to the shooting range or the necessity of farmers to be able to put down an injured animal isn't what we're discussing), is that it puts a whole lot of power into the hands of emotional or panicky people (and sometimes just plain stupid and unstable people) and innocent people end up getting hurt or killed. And of course open carry has a very likely side effect of making all the people around you more nervous and on edge. Just doesn't seem real intelligent to me, seems more like lighting matches so you can see around the room full of gunpowder.
 
J

jb1616

Guest
#16
Since the op didn't offer 'concealed carry' as an option, I checked yes. I'm kool with open carry, nothing new around here. But concealed is far more advantageous.
 

AsifinPassing

Senior Member
Jul 13, 2010
3,608
40
48
#17
Okay, for example, let me quote a true story from Tulsa, Oklahoma. You will not see it in the news (didn't then either), and it illustrates the everyday person changing the situation through firearm.

90 year old man is sitting in his recliner, watching TV. (Very common sight.) Young 20-something guy decides to break into his house. Well, as he's prying the window open with a crowbar, the old man is alerted, and yell's "Don't come in, or I'll shoot!"...

The burglar probably thought, "Yeah, whatever old man...", and proceeded to climb through the window. During this moment, the 90 year old man pulls a .44 magnum out of his recliner's pouch, and literally blows away the guy breaking in.

They tried to prosecute this 90 year old man, but Oklahoma still has laws like, "Make my Day" 'He needed killin'', and others which protected that man's right to defend both his life and property through lethal means.


There are several other instances such as these where the quick access of a firearm drastically changed the situation, but the problem with these issues is that everything becomes a matter of personal interest due to some level of experience, emotional investment, or thinking capital.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have training and regulations on firearms. We certainly should. However, we live in a rather polarized society (USA) that seems to love taking things to one extreme or the other. If we can't find a middle road (like Buddhism always 'tries' to do), then I'd rather have an armed populous vs an unarmed one.


I certainly don't want to spread any fear or paranoia, but in the event that those meant to defend you (police, military, etc) are the ones targeting you, then what? I've been in countries where people are walking around or guarding buildings with AK47s and such...

You know what the funny thing is? Hardly anyone seemed to break the law. Maybe that's because doing so resulted in death. I don't know...*shrugs*

It's a difficult issue though. At the heart of all these arguments are self-interest, but the Christian way is to be self-sacrificing. Selfless vs Selfish...

I know from all my friends in the service, civil or military, that killing someone or someone trying to kill you is a horrific thing that haunts you the rest of your life. The alternative is to let those all to willing for war have their way to do as they please.

Sounds like a lose - lose situation to me. At least there's a chance of escape, freedom, victory, etc.. if you're able to fight back.
 
J

JustWhoIAm

Guest
#18
Okay, for example, let me quote a true story from Tulsa, Oklahoma. You will not see it in the news (didn't then either), and it illustrates the everyday person changing the situation through firearm.

90 year old man is sitting in his recliner, watching TV. (Very common sight.) Young 20-something guy decides to break into his house. Well, as he's prying the window open with a crowbar, the old man is alerted, and yell's "Don't come in, or I'll shoot!"...

The burglar probably thought, "Yeah, whatever old man...", and proceeded to climb through the window. During this moment, the 90 year old man pulls a .44 magnum out of his recliner's pouch, and literally blows away the guy breaking in.

They tried to prosecute this 90 year old man, but Oklahoma still has laws like, "Make my Day" 'He needed killin'', and others which protected that man's right to defend both his life and property through lethal means.


There are several other instances such as these where the quick access of a firearm drastically changed the situation, but the problem with these issues is that everything becomes a matter of personal interest due to some level of experience, emotional investment, or thinking capital.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have training and regulations on firearms. We certainly should. However, we live in a rather polarized society (USA) that seems to love taking things to one extreme or the other. If we can't find a middle road (like Buddhism always 'tries' to do), then I'd rather have an armed populous vs an unarmed one.


I certainly don't want to spread any fear or paranoia, but in the event that those meant to defend you (police, military, etc) are the ones targeting you, then what? I've been in countries where people are walking around or guarding buildings with AK47s and such...

You know what the funny thing is? Hardly anyone seemed to break the law. Maybe that's because doing so resulted in death. I don't know...*shrugs*

It's a difficult issue though. At the heart of all these arguments are self-interest, but the Christian way is to be self-sacrificing. Selfless vs Selfish...

I know from all my friends in the service, civil or military, that killing someone or someone trying to kill you is a horrific thing that haunts you the rest of your life. The alternative is to let those all to willing for war have their way to do as they please.

Sounds like a lose - lose situation to me. At least there's a chance of escape, freedom, victory, etc.. if you're able to fight back.
Why would people fight? Because their intent is to be rebellious and violent or because things have become so bad that they feel they need to resort to desperate measures to help keep hope alive?
 
J

JustWhoIAm

Guest
#19
There's a difference, IMHO, between protecting something worth the cost of protecting and being murderous. A 90 year old (He's 90! What else is he going to do?) shooting someone climbing through a window illegally is something worlds apart from, say, someone going across the street and shooting the neighbor premeditatively.
 
Aug 2, 2009
24,574
4,262
113
#20
Since the op didn't offer 'concealed carry' as an option, I checked yes. I'm kool with open carry, nothing new around here. But concealed is far more advantageous.
I did that because if everyone carried concealed, it doesn't do anything to deter terrorists or would-be mass shooters because everyone still looks unarmed.