| Author | Post |
|---|
Sonora Rebel
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 06:26 pm |
|
Sorry... I'm not ready to open the gate, haul down the flag and let anybody from elsewhere come waltzin' in doin' whatever the hell they feel like. At the border crossing into Nogales, Mexico... there's a big sign: "NO WEAPONS ALLOWED". Years ago... (1969) I startled a Canadian Border dude when he asked if I had any firearms. "Yeah... right here. A Winchester .30-30." I had to unload it and put it in the trunk. Today... I don't think I could cross into BC (or anywhere in Canada) with a firearm. If he can't carry in Canada... let him work to fix that in his own country.
Point is... this guy wants to carry for the novelty of it. Not only that... he feels compelled to 'kill' something... If he can't find a coyote... it'll be an eagle, hawk, falcon, vulture... or whatever else he can find to shoot at. I know the type. 'Can't just enjoy the wild things w/o wantin' to kill somethin'. This isn't about self defense... it's a novelty. Well... he'll find out soon enough what this desert is about in August.
Maybe have a run-in with a momma Javelina or one of 5 kinds of rattler. That is... if the cholla 'n 'pear don't tear his legs up first. We have a couple people disappear in this desert every year. 'Never fails.
Then... there's the Border Patrol checkpoints. I don't think a huntin' license will float if he has a hang-up with them while open carrying. He's not here on an immigrant visa... he's a FOREIGN TOURIST. The AZ Constitution extends to citizens and 'resident' aliens... not TOURISTS. If you are not engaged in 'hunting'... then you are carrying illegally. There's no way anybody could justify carrying into a McDonalds in Phoenix... or Wickenburg... or Tucson and claim they were 'hunting'. If he gets into a situation and actually has to shoot somebody... He's screwed! Then... there's the Indian nations to consider.
As for you marshaul... STFU! You can't even carry loaded in SF... and doubtful you OC at all in the city. A 'sanctuary' city at that. NOTHING preceeds our national sovereignty. Not that you've ever done anything (or would) to defend it.
|
GWbiker
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Mar 21st, 2008 |
| Location: | Tucson, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 527 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 07:07 pm |
|
Sonora Rebel wrote: Sorry... I'm not ready to open the gate, haul down the flag and let anybody from elsewhere come waltzin' in doin' whatever the hell they feel like. At the border crossing into Nogales, Mexico... there's a big sign: "NO WEAPONS ALLOWED". Years ago... (1969) I startled a Canadian Border dude when he asked if I had any firearms. "Yeah... right here. A Winchester .30-30." I had to unload it and put it in the trunk. Today... I don't think I could cross into BC (or anywhere in Canada) with a firearm. If he can't carry in Canada... let him work to fix that in his own country.
Point is... this guy wants to carry for the novelty of it. Not only that... he feels compelled to 'kill' something... If he can't find a coyote... it'll be an eagle, hawk, falcon, vulture... or whatever else he can find to shoot at. I know the type. 'Can't just enjoy the wild things w/o wantin' to kill somethin'. This isn't about self defense... it's a novelty. Well... he'll find out soon enough what this desert is about in August.
Maybe have a run-in with a momma Javelina or one of 5 kinds of rattler. That is... if the cholla 'n 'pear don't tear his legs up first. We have a couple people disappear in this desert every year. 'Never fails.
Then... there's the Border Patrol checkpoints. I don't think a huntin' license will float if he has a hang-up with them while open carrying. He's not here on an immigrant visa... he's a FOREIGN TOURIST. The AZ Constitution extends to citizens and 'resident' aliens... not TOURISTS. If you are not engaged in 'hunting'... then you are carrying illegally. There's no way anybody could justify carrying into a McDonalds in Phoenix... or Wickenburg... or Tucson and claim they were 'hunting'. If he gets into a situation and actually has to shoot somebody... He's screwed! Then... there's the Indian nations to consider.
As for you marshaul... STFU! You can't even carry loaded in SF... and doubtful you OC at all in the city. A 'sanctuary' city at that. NOTHING preceeds our national sovereignty. Not that you've ever done anything (or would) to defend it.
+100000000000000.
I seems Arizona OC gun owners receive advice each week from well meaning out of state posters who should first deal with their own f*cked up gun carry laws, before they lecture us.
|
ccwinstructor
Centurion Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | Yuma, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 136 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 08:34 pm |
|
Sonora Rebel wrote: Sorry... I'm not ready to open the gate, haul down the flag and let anybody from elsewhere come waltzin' in doin' whatever the hell they feel like. At the border crossing into Nogales, Mexico... there's a big sign: "NO WEAPONS ALLOWED". Years ago... (1969) I startled a Canadian Border dude when he asked if I had any firearms. "Yeah... right here. A Winchester .30-30." I had to unload it and put it in the trunk. Today... I don't think I could cross into BC (or anywhere in Canada) with a firearm. If he can't carry in Canada... let him work to fix that in his own country. So.. Why don't you want him to be able to carry openly in Arizona? I did not find a single reason in the above paragraph
Point is... this guy wants to carry for the novelty of it. Not only that... he feels compelled to 'kill' something... If he can't find a coyote... it'll be an eagle, hawk, falcon, vulture... or whatever else he can find to shoot at. I know the type. 'Can't just enjoy the wild things w/o wantin' to kill somethin'. This isn't about self defense... it's a novelty. Well... he'll find out soon enough what this desert is about in August.
Why shouldn't he be able to open carry again? Because he is interested in what is legal to hunt with a pistol? He has only asked what was legal.
Maybe have a run-in with a momma Javelina or one of 5 kinds of rattler. That is... if the cholla 'n 'pear don't tear his legs up first. We have a couple people disappear in this desert every year. 'Never fails.
Then... there's the Border Patrol checkpoints. I don't think a huntin' license will float if he has a hang-up with them while open carrying.
Why would he have a problem? It is legal. He's not here on an immigrant visa... he's a FOREIGN TOURIST. The AZ Constitution extends to citizens and 'resident' aliens... not TOURISTS. I believe you are mistaken. If you are not engaged in 'hunting'... then you are carrying illegally. Why do you say so? The law says if he has a hunting license he can legally possess firearms. There's no way anybody could justify carrying into a McDonalds in Phoenix... or Wickenburg... or Tucson and claim they were 'hunting'. If he gets into a situation and actually has to shoot somebody... He's screwed! Then... there's the Indian nations to consider. Indian nation considerations apply to anyone who is not a member of the tribe.
As for you marshaul... STFU! You can't even carry loaded in SF... and doubtful you OC at all in the city. A 'sanctuary' city at that. NOTHING preceeds our national sovereignty. Not that you've ever done anything (or would) to defend it.
Marshaul, thanks for your input. This forum is for everyone to contribute.
|
marshaul
Activist Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 09:06 pm |
|
Being that my other address is in Virginia, where I can OC while drinking in bars, people should take my opinion with the grain of salt that it's worth, but not assert that I "am lecturing them when I need to deal with my own state's @#$%ed up laws". It's not like my opinion on OC is irrelevant. It's also just an opinion, which I will not "STFU" with.
As for California, we're working on it.Last edited on Wed Jun 24th, 2009 09:14 pm by marshaul
|
crisisweasel
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Feb 3rd, 2009 |
| Location: | Marana, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 86 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 05:31 pm |
|
marshaul wrote:
The human right to self-defense precedes our national sovereignty.
+++ - marshaul, unsurprisingly, gets it right.
A right isn't a right if it's really just a privilege conferred by a piece of paper to people fortunate enough to be born or reside on a plot of land.
Whether you live in Canada, Britain, Ghana, Indonesia, Iran, or anywhere else, human beings, by simple virtue of being human beings, have a right to own and carry weapons for the purpose of self defense, and to speak their mind freely - whether or not their governments choose to recognize that right or not, and as we all know, many don't. The right doesn't vanish in those countries - it is simply infringed or violated - illicitly and immorally - by statist governments.
The issue of killing animals is to me a separate issue from whether or not one should be allowed to carry a gun for self defense. As for personal defense, a human life doesn't become worth less because it's not an American one.
Rights aren't worth anything, and we have nothing on which to stand, if we reduce them to Constitutionally-granted privileges which only locals can enjoy. I have always opposed this idea of rights because it is the basis on which those rights are done away with by majoritarian votes, or in the name of public safety, or some "overriding" concern. In my book, nothing overrides rights, not even national sovereignty. Nothing can, or you weaken them to the point where you legitimize circumstances in which they *can* be taken away.
A right applies universally to all human beings, or it isn't a right at all. I am completely cool with foreigners peaceably and responsibly carrying weapons in the United States. Don't care if they are from Central America if they're here with peaceable intent. I don't care if they're refugees from Afghanistan - so long as they are here with peaceful intent, with the intention not to violate the rights of others. That is the only standard to which anyone should be held.
What I'm not in agreement with is people carrying weapons irresponsibly, aggressively, or for criminal intent, but again, this sentiment applies equally to fellow Arizonans as it does anyone else.
A Canadian has a right to carry a gun here by virtue of having been born into our species. His Canadian nationality could not possibly be less relevant to the fact that he has a right by virtue of being a human being. It is the fact that we are "endowed by our creator (not nationality) with certain inalienable rights" that makes this so. I firmly believe this, and will not budge on this issue.
Period. As for the legality of that, our own government infringes/violates the right to self defense through the laws that do exist. I'd simply caution anyone coming here to stay within the law if they value their liberty.
|
Crossfire Jedi
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 06:31 pm |
|
So the law states he is welcome to come hunt...?I never knew that was the case, that needs to change!
I do welcome toursist into the country, I do welcome people that come in thru the "front door" to become citizens as well.
I think that Marshal was wrong in his statment to Sonora about keep the prejudice at the door when he was making valid points, however, it appears this hasn't been the first time he has caused a stink in the Arizona forums to get a rise out of people.
I have no problem with the human right to self defense, that being said..I do have a problem with tourists coming into our country with guns. I know that seems to be a double standard, but that's how I feel. This post was very odd as it started out with a foreigner using a Glock 9mm to "hunt"..I never heard of such a thing..which throws a flag up on my end, and then he wants to OC...and I believe Sonora was trying to point out this to everyone as well.
I am looking forward now to being bashed by those from out of state  in the Arizona forums
|
crisisweasel
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Feb 3rd, 2009 |
| Location: | Marana, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 86 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 08:15 pm |
|
Crossfire Jedi wrote: So the law states he is welcome to come hunt...?I never knew that was the case, that needs to change!
I have no problem with the human right to self defense, that being said..I do have a problem with tourists coming into our country with guns. I know that seems to be a double standard, but that's how I feel. This post was very odd as it started out with a foreigner using a Glock 9mm to "hunt"..I never heard of such a thing..which throws a flag up on my end, and then he wants to OC...and I believe Sonora was trying to point out this to everyone as well.
Hunting with a 9mm is a separate issue. But let's say someone comes come here from another country and wants to carry a gun for self-defense...by what basis should they not be allowed to do so?
|
TOF
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 08:36 pm |
|
I agree the right to self protection is a universal right so will only address the hunting portion this cycle.
United States of America citizens go to Canada by the thousands every year to hunt every thing from Ptarmigan to Moose. We go all over the world to hunt. There is no good reason to not allow law abiding Canadians, Mexicans or whatever, hunting priveleges in our country and state.
Whatever your individual opinion might be, the State Game and Fish Regulations allow 9MM handguns for the taking of all small and big game except Buffalo. If you don't believe it check the G&F link posted earlier. I prefer a bit more for Elk but that has nothing to do with the law.
Some of you may not like hunting at all. That is tough cause we are going to continue doing so and as far as I am concerned the OP is welcome to join in as long as he has obtained all requisite clearances and licenses.
Last edited on Fri Jun 26th, 2009 08:37 pm by TOF
|
davesnothere
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | Mesa, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 59 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 08:38 pm |
|
crisisweasel wrote:...let's say someone comes come here from another country and wants to carry a gun for self-defense...by what basis should they not be allowed to do so? +1
|
marshaul
Activist Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 08:49 pm |
|
The law is the law. If it is legal for a resident to hunt coyotes with a 9mm, then why not tourists?
If there is a problem, it is not tourists, but hunting coyotes with 9mm. Change the law then. Or, perhaps there is no problem?
I don't post the things I do to "get a rise" out of people. I post because what I post needs to be said (in my opinion).
If I chastise Sonora its because he is constantly putting his fears before liberty, and then accusing half the country of being "pantywaist urbanites".
Edit: Excellent posts by crisisweasel. +1Last edited on Fri Jun 26th, 2009 08:54 pm by marshaul
|
GWbiker
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Mar 21st, 2008 |
| Location: | Tucson, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 527 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 09:10 pm |
|
marshaul wrote: The law is the law. If it is legal for a resident to hunt coyotes with a 9mm, then why not tourists?
If there is a problem, it is not tourists, but hunting coyotes with 9mm. Change the law then. Or, perhaps there is no problem?
I don't post the things I do to "get a rise" out of people. I post because what I post needs to be said (in my opinion).
If I chastise Sonora its because he is constantly putting his fears before liberty, and then accusing half the country of being "pantywaist urbanites".
Edit: Excellent posts by crisisweasel. +1
Well, the law is the law in Arizona, unlike the Republic of Kalynfornia where the Boxers and the Feinsteines determine the law. Part of the gun laws problem in your state.
If it is legal for a resident to hunt coyotes with a 9mm, then why not tourists?
Yes, I like that idea. Arizona residents should start hunting Kalynforina tourists.....
|
Crossfire Jedi
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 09:13 pm |
|
I know where you guys are coming from and I am not saying you are wrong by any means. This is all news to me, and my straight feelings on a tourist OC'n with a Glock 9mm to "hunt" I provided.
My feelings regarding law's around firearms have changed more than I can count, thanks to this site and arizonadefensegroup as you learn quite a bit, even when it can get a bit heated and hostile. I won't pretend to know it all, because I definately do not.
|
Sonora Rebel
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 09:18 pm |
|
They are non-resident aliens! Title 18 USC. The hunting license scam has been used by non-res to purchase guns and ammo... even tho they do not hunt. However... wandering around openly armed (not actively engaged in hunting) is misrepresentation. In AZ... you could prob'ly get away with it. 'Still don't make it right. No more than I could obtain a Canadian hunting license and wander around downtown Mooseputz while armed with an AK.
I care less what the law sez... you ain't gonna kill nothin' in this desert with a Glock 9 unless it commits suicide. No range... and no accuracy at any 'hunting' range. It's not a 'hunting' arm. This Canuck will wilt after 15 minutes in August anyway. He's not 'huntin' anything... just wants to walk around with a gun on his hip. He posted the same stuff in the Utah forums I think it was. How do we know he's a 'native' Canuck? For all we know he's naturalized... and a jihadi. My red flags went up on this one... Huntin' 'coyotes'? He's never seen this desert... or the Rim... That's OK tho? Just turn 'em loose? Some of you are sooo naive.
We let visa holders get pilot licenses in Arizona too... Remember how that turned out?
As a non-resident/ non-citizen... you want self defense? Hire a bodyguard.
Last edited on Fri Jun 26th, 2009 09:20 pm by Sonora Rebel
|
marshaul
Activist Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 09:41 pm |
|
I don't see how it's misrepresentation. The law is quite clear. Nonresident aliens may be armed with a hunting license. If it was intended to be "while hunting", it would say so.
Perhaps the legislator's intent was to balance interests? Allowing nonresidents to arm themselves if they actually care to find out legally how, but still not giving all of them carte blanche to be armed, out of recognition of Sonora Rebel's fear of illegals?
|
Sonora Rebel
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 10:01 pm |
|
Fear's got nothin' to do with it jizjaw. It's about reserving certain Rights for American citizens in THIS State. (A Title 10 thing) You Kommiefornians have already screwed your own state up so bad with illegals it's unfixable.
I am a Nationalist... and, unlike you marshaul... I earned it.
|
marshaul
Activist Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 26th, 2009 10:30 pm |
|
Sonora Rebel wrote:
Fear's got nothin' to do with it jizjaw. It's about reserving certain Rights for American citizens in THIS State. (A Title 10 thing) You Kommiefornians have already screwed your own state up so bad with illegals it's unfixable.
I am a Nationalist... and, unlike you marshaul... I earned it.
So, how does it infringe on your right to self-defense to respect that same right when belonging to another person?
I understand actual thought requires more effort than insults, but try to stay on-track.Last edited on Fri Jun 26th, 2009 10:30 pm by marshaul
|
Sonora Rebel
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 12:14 am |
|
We citizens have certain rights that are not immediely conferred to non-citizens just for entering the country. The Right to bear arms in defense of oneself and the state is NOT one of those. 'Hunting' is not self defense. Hunting is sport. 
It's not 'other persons. That's what your liberal mind gloms on... It's an Alien Foreign National. A 'Subject' of Canada who does not have that Right. Not even in Canada. 
Don't like it... go to Canada and fix it! You've done so much to fix California... it should be a snap! 
Try reading ALL of the words... not just the little ones. 
|
GWbiker
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Mar 21st, 2008 |
| Location: | Tucson, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 527 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 12:34 am |
|
An example how they **FIXED** California guns laws: When the LA Riots kicked off in April '92, LA and surrounding area residents concerned for their safety flocked to gun stores to purchase weapons for home n' family safety. Residents could purchase a gun but then faced a 10 day waiting period until gun was in hand.
Thousands of those residents were shocked to find there was a 10 day wait, although they had sat on their asses when the Boxers and the Finesteins and the other loonies told them the waiting period was an excellent means to fight crime.
No wonder they call Kalynfornya the "Land of Fruits n' Nuts".
|
Sonora Rebel
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 12:45 am |
|
That bill was marketed under the guise of a 'Cooling Off Period'... as tho all firearms are purchased simply to 'do something evil'. This is the sort of projection that the libs create all over.
I just LOVE it when the Kommiefonians start telling Arizonans how to manage our own liberties. They can't even manage their own.
I just had a visual... Boxer and Feinstien 'In Heat' 
Last edited on Sat Jun 27th, 2009 12:47 am by Sonora Rebel
|
marshaul
Activist Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 01:04 am |
|
So, basically, because you can't come up with a decent answer for my question, you talk about California some more? I thought this was the Arizona subforum...
For the last time, I was raised in Virginia. Even if that weren't so, my current state of residence is wholly irrelevant.
Face it, your "conservative" mind just "gloms" on "illegal alien", and all of a sudden you conveniently forget that rights are derived from human nature rather than the Constitution (which merely enumerates a few of them as explicitly protected), and when confronted with this fact you have no response but to sputter illogical irrelevancies about California.
Even in Arizona, the Fourth amendment applies to all persons, not just citizens. Why not the Second?
I fail to understand what actually valid reason there is for denying the right to self-defense for any peaceable human being. So far, you've presented noting more than A: you don't like them, and B: the Bill of Rights doesn't protect illegals (which it, in fact, does, at least in parts).
At best, you still have yet to show why the 4th Amendment applies to everyone but only citizens have the right to self-defense.
Of course, this is an impossible argument, for no amount of legal or "intellectual" wrangling will change the fundamental basis of rights: that they are not distributed by government, but are derived from the nature of what human beings are.
|
Current time is 03:21 am | Page:   1 2 3   |
|
