Cracker Barrel Anti Gun Policy

[Midnight Raver]

Thank you very much for relating your firearms history Enjay, it was very insightful in showing a woman's evolution into the firearms world. In this day and age, the analogy of the Princess waiting to be saved by the Knight just doesn't work out that much any more. Women deserve to defend themselves from the bad people out there.

As for the Carson family, I happen to be totally on their side. They certainly are NOT people just looking to show off their firearms. People used to be able to carry weapons throughout the ages, well into the 19th and even beginning of the 20th century. Then when everything became more "civilized", it was frowned upon and only the Law enforcers would be seen in this fashion. It is a whole different world now in the 21st century...

In my state even slingshots are outlawed, let alone if you are lucky enough to get a CCW permit. My city won't even allow a firearms permit holder to have pepper spray even in your own household to defend yourself with- use a firearm and jail time is iminent. If I was allowed to open carry I wouldn't feel like some cowboy, but I would feel a great deal safer. Say you have a CCW permit up here- if someone discovered that you were carrying they would probably be dialing 911 in a heartbeat. That is most likely the general consensus of the paranoid Liberal sheep up here.

Sad, but pretty much true.

 

[fordnut]

Enjay...Have you ever thought about writing a book or a column for a newspaper???? You have a great talant for writing...

I think I would hold on to every word you write...even if it was a recipe or something else like that...And, I just hope you keep writing...

Now, yes, it is sad...but, in a lot of places the woman is looked on as someone that should be protected...not to protect herself...

I loved the part about the gunshop owner that would not show you a 1911...I know that type, also.

Just glad your husband convinced you to take up the sport and get into shooting...

Oh Yeah...did I mention that I like the way you write???? LOL

Steve

 

[lafayette gregory]

I just want to say thank you to all who have posted here. Having dissenting opinions and voicing them in a civil manner is GREAT. Yes, this board is different. A place where friends can disagree and walk away and still be friends. Congratulations guys and gals. You are a great bunch and this is a great board!



I would like to see open carry. Not because I want to carry in that way - But, because I want the option to do so. And, what others do have little impact on me. I see no reason that I have any right to dictate to others how they follow the Constitution. And the State has no right to impinge constitutional rights of anyone.

 

[Enjay]

Midnight:
I agree about the princess syndrome. Unfortunately the worst perpetrators that I know of are the princesses themselves. I prefer to use that pedestal to dive right back down into the mud where the fun is.

I happen to be totally on the Carson's side as well. I have not received the impression that they're out to attract attention to themselves, just that they simply want the ability to choose how they exercise their rights. The video that Caitlin posted of her experience talking with a lady while they were travelling and OC'ing does, however, to my mind show how willing she is to be an ambassador, educating the woman to her rights in her own state. It was very interesting to hear but I would not have been so receptive to being approached. I get that they don't want to support companies whose policies are against what they're working to change and I applaud their efforts. To paraphrase Mr Caitlin (I'm sorry, I can't remember your name at the moment) he said something along the lines of he doesn't understand why cwp holders aren't interested in OC though and I was trying to explain to him why it's not something I want for me, but that I support the right to choose. His passion and zeal is quite evident and I enjoyed reading it

Yano, there's a couple of houses in my neighborhood for sale, if you'd like to move...

Fordnut:
Thanks! I do enjoy writing, now if I could just figure out a way to write the house work done.
As for the shop owner, I like to think of him as a bad apple, unfortunately he's in an influential position and I worry that his attitude is contagious.

 

[C_Carson]

I'm all for freedom of choice and fully respect and support your interest in open carry, but I do hope that if you can't understand it, you'll at least respect my right to chose not to.
Thanks for the interesting discussion!

That's exactly how I feel. Everyone should have the right to make the decision that's best for themselves, and allow others to do the same rather than saying one particular way is the only way

I just want to say thank you to all who have posted here. Having dissenting opinions and voicing them in a civil manner is GREAT. Yes, this board is different. A place where friends can disagree and walk away and still be friends. Congratulations guys and gals. You are a great bunch and this is a great board!



I would like to see open carry. Not because I want to carry in that way - But, because I want the option to do so. And, what others do have little impact on me. I see no reason that I have any right to dictate to others how they follow the Constitution. And the State has no right to impinge constitutional rights of anyone.

Agree 1000x with everything you said. This was all I was trying to convey with the original post, is that this is what I believe and what I want accorded to me as I go about my normal life. I didn't mean for this thread to turn into a debate about open carry vs. concealed carry, but it has been a very interesting debate, and kept much more civil and calm than other forums. We have a great place here with many great people!

As for the shop owner, I like to think of him as a bad apple, unfortunately he's in an influential position and I worry that his attitude is contagious.

Fortunately, I think the only people someone like that will influence are like minded anyways...and yes, Mr. Caitlin (or Andrew; that made me LOL) does feel very strongly and passionately about this subject, so much so that he doesn't realize not everyone is in the same place as he is, and may feel differently. I try to remind him that his way is right; for him, not necessarily for everyone else. His passion and conviction are just so strong that he doesn't get why others would choose differently.

 

[ConditionOne]

What a great discussion this has been. So much passion, yet the debate has remained sane and respectful. Thanks especially to the Carsons and Enjay for the detail they provided explaining their particular views. It's been very insightful to read.

 

[Avtomat-Acolyte]

Constitutional Carry (i.e. adherence to the Bill of Rights rather than require permission fees or arbitrary training requirements) is the only common sense choice for anyone that was awake during high school civics class.

Fees for permits to carry a gun or other weapon are unConstitutional and are tantamount to poll taxes.

We are afforded the inalienable right to own guns, knives and other deadly weapons. We are also guaranteed the right to wear them on or about our person at will. To regulate or tax this Civil Right is not only illegal but it is immoral.

What tests or permits are required to vote?

 

[tigerfan00]

What tests or permits are required to vote?

being able to survive to age 18 haha

 

[Enjay]

Constitutional Carry (i.e. adherence to the Bill of Rights rather than require permission fees or arbitrary training requirements) is the only common sense choice for anyone that was awake during high school civics class.

What tests or permits are required to vote?

I am unaware of any tests required for natural born citizens to be allowed to vote, although I believe every state requires a voters registration card or state issued ID to be presented as verification of citizenship and voting precinct before you are permitted to cast your ballot. I consider that to be requiring a permit of sorts, particularly the registration card.

From what you've written I understand that you desire the US to follow Constitutional Carry to the letter. Every citizen should be armed. I believe it was you posted earlier that even felons and people who were convicted of domestic abuse should be armed too? Okay, I can kind of understand that, not every felon is violent and some cases of domestic violence are one-off's and outside of the normal behavior of the perpetrator.

What are your feelings about people who are challenged? My nephew has Asperger's Syndrome, which is an autism spectrum disorder. He is considered higher functioning and has a normal to above average IQ and he is not mentally ill, yet he cannot grasp social concepts and is completely oblivious to nuances. Intellectually he understands that other people have feelings but he lacks the ability to understand how his actions effects other people. He will do whatever he feels it takes to get done what he sees as needing accomplished with little regard for others. For example if you said I'm going to go chew so-and-so out he would really believe that you are going to bite them. Depending on his mood and how much he liked that person he might go bite them himself or lash out at you to prevent you from hurting them. He simply cannot understand that it was a figure of speech. I pray that as he gets older he will have a break through and be able to respect and work within the confines of social norms even though he doesn't understand them, but many in his situation never achieve that.

I happen to think that he would excel at shooting competitions where the rules are very clear and black and white with no decisions for him to make using emotional/social tools he is not equipped with. Constitutionally he has every right to own and carry a weapon, but should he? I would not feel safe being around him if he was defensive carrying.

I am uncomfortable with a blanket statement that all people of that nature should have guns, just as I'm uncomfortable saying none of them should, nor am I clear on where the line should be drawn, if it should be drawn, and who should draw it.

I'd be interested to hear opinions from everyone because this can of worms has me stymied.

 

[Avtomat-Acolyte]

Constitutional Carry (i.e. adherence to the Bill of Rights rather than require permission fees or arbitrary training requirements) is the only common sense choice for anyone that was awake during high school civics class.

What tests or permits are required to vote?

I am unaware of any tests required for natural born citizens to be allowed to vote, although I believe every state requires a voters registration card or state issued ID to be presented as verification of citizenship and voting precinct before you are permitted to cast your ballot. I consider that to be requiring a permit of sorts, particularly the registration card.

From what you've written I understand that you desire the US to follow Constitutional Carry to the letter. Every citizen should be armed. I believe it was you posted earlier that even felons and people who were convicted of domestic abuse should be armed too? Okay, I can kind of understand that, not every felon is violent and some cases of domestic violence are one-off's and outside of the normal behavior of the perpetrator.

What are your feelings about people who are challenged? My nephew has Asperger's Syndrome, which is an autism spectrum disorder. He is considered higher functioning and has a normal to above average IQ and he is not mentally ill, yet he cannot grasp social concepts and is completely oblivious to nuances. Intellectually he understands that other people have feelings but he lacks the ability to understand how his actions effects other people. He will do whatever he feels it takes to get done what he sees as needing accomplished with little regard for others. For example if you said I'm going to go chew so-and-so out he would really believe that you are going to bite them. Depending on his mood and how much he liked that person he might go bite them himself or lash out at you to prevent you from hurting them. He simply cannot understand that it was a figure of speech. I pray that as he gets older he will have a break through and be able to respect and work within the confines of social norms even though he doesn't understand them, but many in his situation never achieve that.

I happen to think that he would excel at shooting competitions where the rules are very clear and black and white with no decisions for him to make using emotional/social tools he is not equipped with. Constitutionally he has every right to own and carry a weapon, but should he? I would not feel safe being around him if he was defensive carrying.

I am uncomfortable with a blanket statement that all people of that nature should have guns, just as I'm uncomfortable saying none of them should, nor am I clear on where the line should be drawn, if it should be drawn, and who should draw it.

I'd be interested to hear opinions from everyone because this can of worms has me stymied.

If someone is a threat to society then they should be removed from society. There are multiple avenues to accomplish that goal.

If someone is not a threat to society then why should their Civil Rights be abrogated or dissolved?

If you are not comfortable being in proximity to someone that has unrestricted access to firearms then why are you comfortable being around them with unrestricted access to any number of other implements that have, can, and will be again used to kill or otherwise injure a person?

If you are concerned about someone with poor impulse control and a lack of understanding of cause and effect having a gun then you should also be concerned with them stabbing someone with a pencil or breaking their skull open with a brick or fireplace poker.

There is no grey area for me and there is no question about what is right and necessary. Everyone not in custody should be allowed unrestricted access to any and all weapons as it is their Constitutionally-protected Civil Right.

People will suffer either short-term and be free or suffer long-term and be slaves.

Civil Rights are worth killing for.

Civil Rights are worth dying for.

Civil Rights are worth endangering the lives of others for.

 

[Avtomat-Acolyte]

To address the issue of ID required to vote:

You do not need state-issued ID, or even picture ID, to vote in the USA.

http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=16602

 

[Schultz]

To address the issue of ID required to vote:

You do not need state-issued ID, or even picture ID, to vote in the USA.

http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=16602

You might want to re-check that website you posted. Scroll down and check the states, All though not all states do but some require photo ID including SC.


South Carolina

Existing law:

When any person presents himself to vote, he shall produce his valid South Carolina driver?s license or other form of identification containing a photograph issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles, if he is not licensed to drive, or the written notification of registration.

New law:

When a person presents himself to vote, he shall produce a valid and current ID.

 

[Avtomat-Acolyte]

To address the issue of ID required to vote:

You do not need state-issued ID, or even picture ID, to vote in the USA.

http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=16602

You might want to re-check that website you posted. Scroll down and check the states, All though not all states do but some require photo ID including SC.


South Carolina

Existing law:

When any person presents himself to vote, he shall produce his valid South Carolina driver?s license or other form of identification containing a photograph issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles, if he is not licensed to drive, or the written notification of registration.

New law:

When a person presents himself to vote, he shall produce a valid and current ID.

I'm well-aware that some states require photo ID. Some states do not.

I was merely rebutting the comment that ID is required to vote in the USA. It is not.

Incidentally, requiring someone to purchase a picture ID from their state before exercising a Civil Right is tantamount to a poll tax, as well. The same as requiring someone to pay their Sheriff for a pistol purchase permit or their Attorney General for a concealed handgun permit.

However, this is America. We are a nation of people suffering under the weight of innumerable laws that restrict and erase the Civil Rights that so many people literally poured their blood out upon the ground for us to have. And that's okay. No one cares. If the US Constitution meant anything it wouldn't have been ignored wholesale for longer than any of us have been alive. At least it's where it belongs... in a museum with all the other useless, anachronistic garbage we discarded long ago.

 

[lafayette gregory]

BTW- Currently there is a bill in congress that will require a state of federal issued ID to vote in national elections. The political spin is that it is a republican initiative in response to the acorn groups actions.

 

[lafayette gregory]

BTW- Currently there is a bill in congress that will require a state of federal issued ID to vote in national elections. The political spin is that it is a republican initiative in response to the acorn groups actions.


Question? It may not be required to have a valid ID to vote in some states - But does it not require a state issued ID to obtain a voter registration card in every state?

 

[Pops]

The NC version of the law being proposed also includes a power bill etc in your name with a local address.
It is not so much about "are you Jose Cruz?", but "do you actually live in this precinct?"
You need to prove who you are to turn on power and water in NC so that part has already been resolved.

As for the ACORN part, the NC law does, indeed, seek to thwart their ability to vote in one precinct and then drive across town and vote again under the name of someone recently deceased. This is voter fraud and is a very real problem.

To address the question of open carry in Cracker Barrel , I have never seen anyone carrying openly in public and I felt threatened. As a matter of fact, I usually assume they are police officers and therefore I felt safer. I don't think cowboy/cowgirl.

And I suggest that if you carry at all its only logical to include the possibility of defending someone besides yourself in your list of possible scenarios. If you don't pre-consider and plan for that you may find yourself in a situation where you have to make a life changing decision with little or no time to think about it.

Pops

 

[Enjay]

Avtomat-acolyte
I asked for your opinion, and you gave it to me very clearly and succinctly. Thank you, I appreciate your taking the time to do so.

I wish things were as clear for me, but they're not. I think perhaps I allow my emotions to get into the way. I'll have to work on that.

Enjay

 

[Dave29461]

Begging your pardon, I think you were very clear. You support open carry but do not wish to open carry. That is as clear as it can be. That is also a very valid stance to take. If someone else is comfortable carrying openly more power to them. You need not apologize for having a different opinion. Nor should you feel intimidated by anther's strong opinion. As long as you are comfortable with your stand it is the right thing for you. There goes that damn libertarian coming out in me again. :lol:

 

[Enjay]

Thanks Dave. I am firm in my belief that Open Carry is not for me, and that I believe it should be available.
I was referring to Avtumat's opinion regarding people who have mental deficiencies such as those with autism spectrum disorders.

 

[Frost]

Personally I can live with no open carry for now.
My big thing is places that do not allow concealed carry.