Why was Brand arrested when he went into public?
bcuz he was carrying firearms
bcuz he was carrying firearms
Firefighter 
Water you saying?
you made my day.
k gave it almost 24 hours and no one said it "Brand"ishing Firearms..
[{quoted}](name=7th Syn,realm=NA,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=lKB3P2K7,comment-id=000b,timestamp=2017-02-22T08:33:15.135+0000)
k gave it almost 24 hours and no one said it "Brand"ishing Firearms..
that was pretty good.
have an upvote
but on a more serious note, isent carrying a gun openly legal?
have an upvote
but on a more serious note, isent carrying a gun openly legal?
well, not where I'm from I think.
EDIT: I'm not from Na, but I just play there lul
have an upvote
but on a more serious note, isent carrying a gun openly legal?
Pretty sure it varies by state in the U.S.
Openly carrying firearms is strictly forbidden in Austria.
I'm fairly sure a number of US states also prohibit this.
You can get a permit for it though.
True, but even with a permit it's heavily looked down upon.
only by pansies
You should reread my post and look up the country I mentioned.
It varies state by state, but it shouldn't. The Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States clearly states that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
It varies state by state, but it shouldn't. The Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States clearly states that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
On the contrary, if you read it, it's not clear whether open carry is allowed for citizens or for a local militia.
As I was saying, it's a technicality. I'm not anti arms. I'm someone who has studied the law, and as such I can see how it can be unclear. The interpretation of the constitution is luckily correct in this case as the context is taken into account, however, as the "local militia" stuff is the opening statement, without further context expressly clarifying it we wouldn't have the right to bear arms at the moment.
Funny thing is, prohibiting it at all is unconstitutional.
Funny thing is, prohibiting it at all is unconstitutional.
lol no its not, no your constitution haha
The second ammendment is the right to BEAR arms, yes it is unconstitutional.
The second ammendment is the right to BEAR arms, yes it is unconstitutional.
Bearing arms means you can own them, not carelessly walk in public with them.
Bearing arms means you can own them, not carelessly walk in public with them.
if we're talking about the constitution of the united states then -
actually it means you can carry them on your person. the word bear means to carry. like ring bearers in weddings. they carry the ring flaunting it openly. concealed carry is actually more dangerous, but less likely to cause a commotion.
so in short - you're wrong.
here are several website definitions of the word bear.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/bear
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bear
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bear
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/bear
so basically any law that states that you cant bear (carry/transport/hold) your arms is fundamentally unconstitutional if you're going by the bill of rights. however, the bill of rights has been amended to be updated to modern times. the purpose of the 2nd amendment was to allow a state to defend itself from any foreign invader without the need of a standing military by making sure that everyone could use and owned their own weapon - weapons were hard to come by back during the time of muskets and each one had to have it's own special ball casting kit.
besides that it was a way for the governing body to provide reassurance to the people that if the government was to step out of line then the common people could "persuade" the government towards a better path. you wouldn't believe the amount of support you can get from telling people that they will be their own bosses.
skip forward 200 years and now we have modernized manufactured weaponry that can sweep an entire village in a blink of an eye. that's definitely not okay to be brandishing around. the amount of fear and power involved in those types of devices are too extreme to allow in public environments. so the bill of rights was amended to be modernized preventing a lot of military grade hardware and other forms of "firearms" from creating distress and upheaval in the nation.
what does that mean? that means that laws are being made to prevent the average joe from owning superior military grade firearms and combustibles and most future and recent weapons are not in circulation legally if at all. the fear of firearm abuse however is why there are currently laws the prevent open carry in a lot of states. there are also states that have adopted concealed carry to try to allow the continuation of the 2nd amendment without the irrational, yet understandable widespread fear that firearms can cause. if it wasnt for the fear and potential danger that a brandished (casually waved around) firearm can cause then it would be completely legal to own and bear firearms in public in every state without any opposition - just not the high grade military stuff.
and to be fair waving a gun in anyone's face have never been allowed. it's considered irresponsible and a form of threat. due to the prolonged painful deaths and instant deaths that a bullet can cause depending on the caliber and powder composition among other variables in certain places depending on the context it can be reacted to with quite a bit of force and aggression. they've made jokes and coined lines about it in movies even because it used to be somewhat of an easy way to promote a fight. that's not the same as bearing.
i hope you enjoyed reading.
here are some sites to the U.S. bill of rights and the current constitution.
https://www.constitutionfacts.com/content/constitution/files/Constitution_BillOfRights.pdf
This was amazing and beyond informative! This was more of what I was intending to put, but was in a hurry and impatient. Thanks for the great read!
You can open carry is most states. Concealed you need a permit :p
You should be ashamed. Have an upvote.
[{quoted}](name=midnight oil24,realm=NA,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=lKB3P2K7,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-02-21T13:27:56.720+0000)
You should be ashamed. Have an upvote.
Why be Ashamed? I don't think it's really that emberrassing.
You are really igniting my temper. Simmer down, please.
You certainly have a flare for this
You are really igniting my temper. Simmer down, please.
Actually igniting cannot really be used that way. The more correct fire related terms would be kindling or stoking.
you better cool it before his head boils and he pulls a goku.
you know, when he goes supernova
I'm just saiyajin.
yes, I shoehorned it.
you better cool it before his head boils and he pulls a goku.
you know, when he goes supernova
I'm just saiyajin.
yes, I shoehorned it.
Lol yep.
LOL
this post went better than i expected
Name checks out
This Brand joke is gold. You're on fire!