Search Results for: open carry

In Which I Prefer Pullman

By | |
18 Comments

So here I am in BFE Idaho, in a small town that is a blink of an eye as you drive through.  I have been open carrying for the most part unless I am wearing my coat or am wearing my staff shirt.

As I’m standing there talking with a couple hams an officer comes up looking for another officer, who actually happens to be a ham.  We start getting the info for who he’s looking for and I notice he looks at my right hip a couple times.  Immediately my brain locks on the cue.  Currently I’m not worried at all, I’m surrounded by people I know, many of whom are also currently carrying concealed weapons. It just so happens that I’m just the one who doesn’t give a crap about someone being upset by seeing me with a gun.

After a brief attempt to pull his partner up on the ham frequencies since his PD repeater failed the conversation goes something like this. (Officer’s words, my words)

Can I get you to untuck your shirt and cover up your sidearm?

Any particular reason? Open carry is still legal in Idaho right?

Yes, it is legal, but a lot of people have noticed (him) and it is making some of them uncomfortable.  I like that you’re carrying and I appreciate that you’re carrying, I just want to put people at ease.

(At this point I untuck again choose your battles wisely.)

Thanks.

A couple different observations.  First, out of all the time I have been carrying, no one has really said anything to me about it.  I know some people it does make them uncomfortable but how is this for a comparison?

Officer, that man over there is carrying a gun. I don’t like that and can you do anything about it?

Versus:

Officer, that man over there is black.  I don’t like him being here and can you do anything about it?

What I was doing is perfectly legal and overall if people were noticing, he was just getting tired of having to calm the sheep.  In that case I sympathize.  I did discover though that the Sherriff for Idaho County is more of a FUD in that he doesn’t want people open carrying in cities when you drill down into it.  So couple that with what happened while I was carrying in town we are starting to see a possible narrative.

I will give the officer the benefit of the doubt for two reasons.  First he was civil and respectful.  He wasn’t in a “respect my authoritah” mode.  Secondly covering up created a new problem.  Technically without a permit wouldn’t be able to conceal carry.  He never asked to see my permit, even after switching to concealed carry.

Everyone I talked to that wasn’t there got a total laugh out of it though.  It’s freaking rural Idaho, everyone around here is carrying a gun!  I got the officers name but didn’t record it immediately there after.

Overall it was an interesting experience, doubly so for rural Idaho.  I have heard stories of Moscow PD abusing open carriers, but Riggins isn’t exactly huge.

So after getting through all that, here’s a race picture.

DSC_3741

Sadly I clipped the nose off the boat otherwise that would have been one bad ass picture.  This boat is currently the only remaining turbine and the worlds leader.

In Which A Republican Betrays Us

By | | , , , ,
4 Comments

So I mentioned previously something about a protest last Saturday night.  Well we turned out because the president of the Moscow city council has thrown gun owners under the bus.

Enforcement of existing regulations is crucial, but gaps and loopholes pertaining to the sale, trade, and possession of illegal guns and ammunition also need to be closed.  Law enforcement officials here recommend consideration of:

  • Mental illness in the issuance of permits;
  • Limiting multiple gun sales to an individual within a specified time period;
  • Requiring gun purchasers to have a designated extended waiting period and thorough background check;
  • Requiring all gun sales, including at gun shows and personal sales, to be federally-documented, traceable, and completed in-person through authorized Federal firearms licensees;
  • Increasing penalties for unlawful gun possession and use;
  • Limiting access to high-capacity gun magazines;
  • Controlling the sale of ammunition by:
    • Recording all sales and conducting on-site background checks for disqualification;
    • Prohibiting the sale of armor-piercing bullets and explosive rounds to the public

Among many other calls for infringements and attacks on an inalienable right.

This provoked a response from those who live in the community, especially since the Latah County GOP Lincoln Dinner was going to be held last Saturday.  Can you guess what my buddy Jefferson organized?

If you said a protest outside the building the dinner was being held in, you would be right.IMAG0484

IMAG0485

These were the pictures I took before an additional group of miscreants spread the line down the sidewalk towards the intersection.  Overall I estimate the turn out probably about 30-35 at the peak and given there was only about 48 hours notice I don’t think that’s too bad.  Especially given the fact that the protest started at 1700 and it was about 32 degrees.  It ended at 2000 and it was much colder.

The night was filled with humor including a Canadian who seems to hate America and stated so by yelling “F*** America.”  I don’t think he expected an immediately reply before he finished of “F*** You.”  While one would claim my response was unnecessary as he was driving a Honda Element, it was worth it as he almost hit a car, cut another one off, and barely missed a light pole which all happened immediately after the response.

I do my best to remain civil and will remain civil as long as you return that respect to me.  While some would argue about being the better man, many of these people prey upon the fact of expecting no response.  Remember, many of these liberals are very violent and expect us to withhold our opinions in an effort as not to offend.

Screw that.   I restrained myself when I made my sign.

clip_image001

Image Credit: Dean Hare Moscow Pullman Daily News
It’s not about guns. It’s about Control.

You know what I really wanted to write for my sign?

Why do I need a 30 round magazine?

Because F*** You! That’s why!

Again I agree with Uncle and that’s why I didn’t do it… as much as I really wanted to.

I am a bit disappointed because my friend to the right didn’t let me know he was bringing his carbine otherwise I would have brought mine.  I didn’t want to be the only guy open carrying a carbine because honestly that’s a great way to end up in trouble.  It is worth noting I was standing next to a lawyer, but I’d rather not need one.  There is strength in numbers, especially at a political rally.  Further it ended up when I got there the Moscow PD had sent an email asking people not to open carry… given Idaho is an open carry state that would have made me want to just on principal.

Now some would also argue that carrying a carbine with a real can isn’t worth it.  I can tell you it was.  More than once I grabbed my buddies chest to turn him so it was right there as some little old lady looked like she was going to have a heart attack.

The majority of the people driving by honked in support.  There were a few hecklers such as the Canadian, though we did love the fuel truck that blew his air horn the whole way past us.  The best part of all the honking, we know they could hear it inside at the dinner.

The most entertaining part of the night though was the fact that the protest probably caused a divorce, either that or it was the last date.  A couple pulled up in a minivan and the driver gave us a thumbs up.  The woman was shaking her head and obviously said something negative.  He replied in the positive, she flipped us the bird at which point the light turned green and they drove off obviously in an argument.

We ended up on the front page of the local paper, sadly the print version used the guy who couldn’t spell inalienable, i before e except after c…  Overall though I think the protest was definitely worth it and hopefully we can finally get that tyrant Walter Steed out of office.

The Greatest Equalizer…

By | | , , ,
1 Comment

This is a little long, but read the whole thing. It is another example of “Why I Carry.”

I received a text from a relative the other night… this is what it said:So, I’m busy at the time at a business open house and on my way home I give the relative a call.

Background:

TMM For Scale…

Before I get into the details of the story, let me relate the following. This relative is 74 years old, under 5 foot, and has silver-gray hair and is a breast cancer survivor. From now on we will just refer to her as: “Short Lady with the Gray Hair” or SLwtGH for short.  She drives a retired police car we picked up used for a decent price after her previous car finally began to die after 23 years of use.

Story:

I call the SLwtGH and she informs me of the events from her day.  For whatever reason that morning she decided that she needed to carry Tweety, her revolver with her.  She headed into Tacoma to play bridge with some friends.  For those who aren’t familiar with the People’s Republic of Puget Sound, Tacoma isn’t exactly the friendliest depending on where you are, but this was going to be mid day and she would be traveling home by 1500 so it’s not like the animals would be prowling right?

She leaves her friend’s house and at about 1440 she turns left off of E 38th street and heads North on East Portland Ave.

The full frame of the incident. The distance from E38th to Fairbanks is .4 miles.

At the time she turned left she checked her rear view mirror and saw no one behind her, blind spot clear she moved from the left lane to the right lane.

At East Fairbanks she noticed two dark color vehicles approaching from the rear. She maintained speed at 40 thinking  this is nothing significant, other than traffic.

One vehicle rapidly speeds past, immediately pulls in front, rapidly stops forcing the SLwtGH to slam on her brakes. The second car blocks the drivers side preventing immediate egress from the area. The only exit is backwards or through the vehicles.

Three men get out of the vehicles. Two out of the vehicle directly in front. The third got out of the vehicle blocking the driver side. One has a revolver at his side, another has a knife, the third has a semi-automatic pistol. At this point the SLwtGH is dialing 911 and drawing her firearm. She places it in a retention position on her chest.  About midway through their approach of the vehicle the men stop their approach. They begin conversing, the words said are unknown.  At this same time the SLwtGH is relaying her location to dispatch.

Suddenly there is a siren and lights approaching from the east. The officers pull in front of the two black cars blocking any attempted egress and the officers exit the vehicle weapons drawn.  The officer and his partner in the first car immediately took control of the situation and put the individuals in custody. Two other cars arrived shortly after.

After the officers had placed the individuals in custody they approached the SLwtGH , asked to see her weapon and carry permit.  She was then informed they were well acquainted with subjects, she was absolutely justified and had nothing to worry about. They would be going away for an extended period on multiple warrants. She was thanked for maintaining poise and thoughtfulness.

She let the officers clear the scene and then she did so.

Major notes, the criminals were traveling in packs, attempted to attack what they thought they was a soft target. This event happened in broad daylight on a thoroughfare.

AAR and my takes:

Most likely this was an attempted car jacking. As the SLwtGH was driving a retired police car it is both hardened, as well as useful if you want to imitate being an officer to rob people.  Overall the event happened quickly, it was lucky there were officers in the immediate vicinity. The SLwtGH kept her cool and remained calm event though she was under stress.

In this incident all three elements for deadly force existed:

  1. Ability: They were armed and there was no question about them being so.
  2. Opportunity: Two of the individuals were armed with ranged weapons capable of piercing the windshield.
  3. Jeopardy: The men out numbered an elderly, short, woman, blocked her vehicle, were approaching it armed, with no legal reason to be doing so.

Alternative Weapons:

While giving a debrief she noted that even if she attempted to back up, she would have still had difficulty fleeing because of the distance required to get around them. I reminded her of two things.

  1. She was in a hardened vehicle that gives her an advantage others don’t have. She could have backed up enough to wedge through the two vehicles.
  2. Her vehicle has enough power and is reinforced on the front that she could have pushed that front car out-of-the-way.

Remember your vehicle is a weapon, don’t be afraid to use it as such.

It happens fast, remain calm:

This kicked off fairly fast, I’m impressed SLwtGH was able to get 911 on the horn and have her firearm ready to rock.

This was most likely because she did not sit in denial of the events happening in front of her. Many people when confronted will deny what’s going on, trying to rationalize that this isn’t really happening or that they’re being hyper critical and the danger they’re seeing isn’t really there.  Process your input and act on it, don’t deny what you’re seeing, don’t down play it. Let the data and events speak for itself. If new data says it’s not as dangerous, great, but don’t trying and play the hypotheticals as it is happening.

Her firearm made the difference.

The presence of her firearm interrupted their game plan. This was a defensive gun use, however statistically this wouldn’t be counted.  As a side note this makes for 5 defensive gun uses in my family, in all 5 instances there wasn’t a shot fired. They had their own preconceived notion of how this was going to go down. They figured it was a soft target and would need little effort other than intimidation. When they approached the vehicle, the firearm caused them to suddenly need to start working on a new game plan. I’ve seen this happen personally in another incident where the individual was armed.

If you find yourself in a similar situation that is the moment you need to capitalize on. What has happened is the initiative has flipped, they no longer have the edge of their plan. This is when you can either talk the person down, I did in one case, wait and see if they’re going to decide discretion is the better part of valor, as the SLwtGH did here.

Additional side note, if they are already committed to performing an act of violence in their plan such as shooting you, they will likely not freeze or stop. I suspect this is because mentally that haven’t counted on the escalation path and the probability of them not surviving the encounter. Someone already committed to the violent act will most likely not waver.

Final thoughts:

Sean’s notes on this are spot on. We’ve got yet another crap gun control initiative in this state being funded by Bloomberg and company. In two weeks time there were two defensive gun uses within my family.

The issue isn’t with firearms, it isn’t with law-abiding gun owners, it’s with the tolerant behavior surrounding violent crime. We’re restricting the rights of the innocent under the guise of stopping criminals, and then acting surprised criminals are becoming bolder, because they don’t care. In the end, criminals prey on the weak. Why are we wanting the people who’ve contributed to society and continue to do so turned into prey?

Final though, don’t tell me you want to ban firearms or otherwise disarm innocent people, I am sick of playing that game. The only way the SLGH had any chance there was a firearm. Even if they had just had clubs, she’s old, small, and out numbered. You’re a sick horrible person and honestly, the body count of innocent people being dead isn’t on us. We carry every day to protect ourselves and those we love. Just look at the pastor who stopped a car jacker when he was taking his 6th car after previously shooting numerous people.

So don’t you dare tell me blood is on our hands for supporting gun owners and law-abiding citizens. 5 defensive gun uses, not a single shot fired in any of them, and in the last one:

The Short Lady with the Grey Hair stared down a bunch of armed thugs to the point where they’re now sitting in jail.

How ready are you for when violence shows up unexpectedly? Remember it doesn’t call ahead, you’re not really going to get a warning until it happens. Are you ready to be like the Short Lady with the Gray Hair?

Can We Start Ridiculing TSA Agents Publicly Yet?

By | | , , , , ,
1 Comment

About a year ago I called for people to start verbally harassing and otherwise making people who work for the TSA ashamed of what they do.  There were a few people who seemed to think that it was a pointless idea and that those people were just doing a hard job.

Here’s my problem with that.  TSA agents blatantly violate and ignore their own rules and regulations, and then you have some agents while violating said rules, they act in a way as to desecrate a deceased loved one.  Then they laugh about what they just did.

“I was told later on that she had no right to even open it, that they could have used other devices, like an X-ray machine. So she opened it up. She used her finger and was sifting through it. And then she accidentally spilled it.”

The agent’s response?

“She didn’t apologize. She started laughing. I was on my hands and knees picking up bone fragments. I couldn’t pick up all, everything that was lost. I mean, there was a long line behind me.”

The TSA website has the following statement regarding their policy on human remains:

 Out of respect to the deceased and their family and friends, under no circumstances will an officer open the container even if the passenger requests this be done. Documentation from the funeral home is not sufficient to carry a crematory container through security and onto a plane without screening.

So I’m sure this particular agent will receive some extra training but that doesn’t excuse her attitude and behavior toward this passenger.  Behavior such as this from TSA agents is not the exception but the norm. There was a recent congressional report for Congressman Marsha Blackburn that detailed only 50 of the numerous crimes since 2005.  Most disturbing of the 50 detailed was the following statistic:

Theft is followed closely by sex crimes and child pornography charges, with 14 such incidents listed in Blackburn’s report. Six TSA employees were charged with possession of child pornography; one of them got caught because he “uploaded explicit pictures of young girls to an Internet site on which he also posted a photograph of himself in his TSA uniform,” the report notes. Eight others were charged variously with child molestation, rape (including child rape), and even running a prostitution ring. It’s not hard to figure out why persons possessing such proclivities would seek jobs where they would be able to ogle and grope other people’s private parts with impunity.

So I again ask, why do people put up with this behavior and not start causing discomfort?  At a minimum you might make them police their own instead of everyone just looking the other way.  Heck, even the legal system is looking the other way and the real reason these individuals are in trouble is they got caught.  That’s why they are given probation for knowingly and willfully committing a crime.  Not just probation, but their record will remain clean without a conviction.   Whereas if you’re unlucky enough to get in an auto wreck from bad weather, you end up with a conviction, even though you intended no malice or harm.  They willfully violate other agency rules and cause damage to medical equipment.  Then after they’ve done the damage they play dumb about it.

Our congressional representatives instead of actually attempting to solve the problem have instead just exempted themselves from the indignities and crimes done by the TSA.  There have been a few instances where the TSA has abused a congress critter but the furor quickly dies out.  Our legal system as shown above is refusing to hold agents accountable for their actions.  For all intents and purposes though government has been shown to be incapable and inept and reining in the monster they created.  So other than hanging agents from trees, running them out on rails, and buckets of tar and feathers what is there left?  What is left to cause agents to either police themselves or leave the corrupt service they have created?

Agents themselves have absolutely no issue disgracing, abusing, and otherwise violating the public which they supposedly serve.  Their job itself is a farce and nothing more that a wasteful joke intended to make those who are sheep feel better.  The batting average of the public at large for stopping terrorist attacks since September 11th is 1000.  The batting average for the TSA since that date is 0.  Sure they’ve lucked out and found items people forgot about, but they have yet to actually find someone who set out with an intent to deceive the system.  They actually fail red team tests on a regular basis.

So given this information, why do the people who actually succeed at stopping terrorist attacks put up with this garbage from a bunch of high school dropouts who are incapable of reading at a 1st grade level?  I think any kid could read that statement from the TSA above and know thou shall not open the urn.

At this point, I want to see a group of passengers start chanting, “Two by two hands of blue”* while others continue to educate the agents on why they’re a bunch of tyrannical tories who deserve no love from their countrymen.

The TSA has created this us vs them environment and the sooner we all realize it already exists the better.  The only argument I have heard against calling these jack booted thugs out as they are was that we could increase the rift.  Well the rift is already pretty damn big, what the hell else do you want?  A hole through the middle of the earth, would that finally be big enough for you to say the time is now?

Personally I think verbal abuse isn’t enough any more, a rail, tar, and feathers I think still might be too nice for most of these folks.  Start off verbally and if they double down on stupid, break out the rail.

*If you don’t get the reference, go watch Firefly… now.  Seriously why are you still here? It’s on Netflix and Hulu and you can watch the whole series and Serenity in a day.

h/t To Uncle on this one.

A Personal Discovery

By | |
Comments Off on A Personal Discovery

Those that know me and spend time around me know that I carry anywhere I am legally allowed.  This isn’t a joke and it isn’t an exaggeration.  Going to the store, grab the gun.  Going to visit a friend, grab the gun.  Heading out on the boat, grab the gun.  Getting dressed in the morning to do work around the house, grab the gun.  To me carrying a firearm is as common as carrying a wallet or watch.  As it should be.

I do this for a couple different reasons.

  1. The burden on my belt is much lighter than the burden of regret.
  2. Because I can.
  3. Because there is no advantage to myself by not carrying.
  4. Because it’s my right.
  5. Because being prepared should not be frowned upon

So last night at the ham radio meeting it was business as usual. I was sitting rubbing my forehead because of a sinus headache while two members to my right were having a conversation.  I was openly carrying my 1911 on a OWB holster so it was quite visible.  Since I was in Idaho my give a crap meter was at about -20, even in Washington it registers only about a 1 until I get to the West side.

All of the sudden I head one of the men go, “Sir are you wearing a side arm?”  I look up at him with a half cocked smile and say, “Yes sir, I am.”  Usually that is about the end of a conversation but he was a little more persistent than most and responded with, “Why are you carrying a side arm?”  It currently was a polite question and certainly reasonable.  I just politely responded, “Because I can.”  At this point he was shocked that I would carry a weapon and his voice showed it because he repeated the same question with a tone of disdain in his voice.

At this point I had a personal revelation.  That type of behavior will place me in threeper mode at a speed otherwise only known to photons.  Because I didn’t think, I didn’t blink, my face just went stern and I looked right at him and calmly but without any hesitation said, “Because it’s my god given right.”

That was the end of the conversation.  He no longer pressed me, he no longer talked to me with disdain in his voice.  I don’t know if he was just inquisitive and it came off wrong it’s hard to say.  Considering he halted his current conversation to focus on my sidearm it’s hard for me to think he was really just generally inquisitive.

That is the first time I’ve ever climbed the “threeper hill” and used the it’s my right argument.  I will say in this case it was quite effective and given my headache at the moment I liked it’s nuke the site from orbit effect.  That said I prefer a much more tactical approach to sway people, but it has now been established that if you treat me as a substandard person for carrying a gun, I will go threeper on your ass.

Doubly entertaining was about 5 minutes later another buddy of mine showed up to the meeting and was open carrying as well.  The icing on the cake was we were both sitting next to each other.  I’m not sure if the guy noticed or not, I really don’t care.  But I wasn’t the only one in the room any more and it made it all the better.  Sadly the wife was busy so she wasn’t with me, otherwise she would have been open carrying her’s as well.

WSU Student Rights and Little London

By | |
Comments Off on WSU Student Rights and Little London

So the level of brainwashing that has been inflicted upon our youth has been quite apparent over the past few weeks of reading the Washington State University news paper.  The first article is an effort to bring a little bit of Brittan right here to the heartland of America.

The Pullman Police Department will install security cameras in high
crime public areas in College Hill as a part of a two-year grant the
police department received from the United States Department of Justice.

The royal kicker though is what the editorial board admits in a following opinion piece.

The Daily Evergreen Editorial Board would like to urge students to
accept and support the installation of security cameras in Adam’s Mall.
The cameras will probably do little to deter crime as drunken brawlers
are unlikely to consider the fact that a camera is watching them.

(Emphasis mine.) They readily admit that the cameras will not deter crime.  The school continues to prohibit the ability for students to lawfully carry on campus and the paper is more than supportive against allowing lawful carry.  Yet they are more than willing to argue that students throw away their privacy for semblance of security.  It is a public place after all so really how much privacy should you have.  Well the editorial board obviously doesn’t care considering the following piece I saw in yesterdays paper.

Barring campus police from patrolling the most densely populated living areas on campus is a huge mistake.


Residence halls are not private residences. They are not houses
or apartments – they are more akin to hotels. They are places students
stay for a few short months, then leave for vacation, then come back to
again, then leave, return, leave for the summer and usually never return
afterward.

About 5 years ago while I was a student there was a court case involving unnecessary access by police to the residence halls.  The judge ruled that the police were not allowed access to the dorms except in an emergency.  The reasoning is that dorms were a residence much like an apartment building.  Evidently the editorial board is acting like their brethren the Brady Campaign in ignoring the reasoning behind the case.  The editors would prefer to ignore this much like CSGV disregards Heller and McDonald.

Further the comparison they use to a hotel fails their litmus test, not to mention their other excuses as well.  The police are not allowed to meander around the halls of a hotel without cause or warrant.  Their statements smack of a belief that the police exist to operate as an RA for the school.

RAs have complete access to each individual’s room within a
residence hall. They are the ones now expected to enforce the law within
the dorms. The only problem is, RAs are students like the rest of us.
They are subject to enjoying the same vices they are supposed to be on
the lookout for.


Police officers have years of training and experience when it comes to upholding the law. RAs do not.

The job of the RA is not to enforce the law, but to ensure the dorm rules are followed and mediate disputes.  If the law is broken it is the job of the police to investigate after the fact.  It is not the job of the police to prevent crime, that is the job of the populace at large.  In other words, fellow residents should be acting in a manner to aid in preventing crime.  The police have no duty to protect and it is the responsibility of the citizen to protect themselves and their property.

The Daily Evergreen Editorial Board is doing no good by attempting to destroy the rights of their fellow students.  Many fought long and hard to secure their right from the police unlawfully entering their place of residence.  While living in the dorms, many leave their doors open not out of want or an open door policy, but because it is so damn hot they need the air flow.  An officer walking up and down the hall would now be able to see into the room by incidental viewing.  He could also achieve this as they occupant gains entrance into their room and close the door behind them.  With so many laws and rules on the books now, why are you attempting to surrender one of your defenses from their abuse? 

While many college campuses swing a bit to the left, this over reliance on the state and belief that the police are the solution to all their problems is very disconcerting.  Doubly so when you consider the fact that they have not bothered to look into the context of why the push was made to throw officers out of the dorms.  The universities own rules as well as the expectation of privacy created the reasons the police were illegal within the dorms.  The Daily Evergreen Editorial board should examine its view on personal liberty and freedom and explain why they believe that college students should surrender it because they are attending school.  Because some students are criminals doesn’t make them all criminals and the law exists to protect the innocent, not catch the criminal.  That is not a bug, it’s a feature.

A Good Diplomat

By | |
Comments Off on A Good Diplomat

As I said previously when carrying you’re a diplomat, and Robb Allen does a fantastic job in his interview.

I think Caleb from Gun Nuts Media said it better than I can.

I want everyone who advocates for open carry to go to Robb’s blog and watch the video he did with the local ABC affiliate.  That is how you advocate for open carry.  He looks like a normal dude, doesn’t shout about A RIGHT UNEXERCISED IS LOST, and he certainly didn’t wave a shotgun around.  Instead, he acted like a rational dude and made his points succinctly and intelligently.  And he even wore pants.

Whether or not you like it, while carrying you are having to break down the negative stereotypes associated with carrying from the media.  This is much more easily done by acting and behaving exactly like Robb did.  Serious kudos to you Robb, that’s the way to win hearts and minds!

That’s a California politician for ya!

By | | , , , , ,
Comments Off on That’s a California politician for ya!

Instead of fixing the issue that has caused people to open carry as a public statement, Lori Saldaña just wants to stop them from making their statement.

To some lawmakers, carrying around an empty gun seems threatening. In a quick response to this perceived but non-threat, AB1934 was drafted to make it a crime to carry an empty firearm in plain view. The bill’s author, Assemblywoman Lori Saldaña, D-San Diego, is quoted as saying, “What I’m concerned about is people, who have no training, can carry a gun for no other purpose than to make a public statement.”

California is a may-issue state. Translation for the uninitiated; do you like kissing ass? Because if you want a license, start kissing your local sheriffs ass. People to protest this have been doing protests legally by carrying unloaded firearms openly. Instead of looking at the flaws in the process, she intends to further restrict and punish law abiding citizens. I find it interesting that some law makers are uncomfortable by firearms being in possession of their constituents, is it because they’re afraid that one day they may be held accountable for their actions?