Sonic And Chili's Announce No-Gun Policies

[Teddy B 17,252]

Sigh. I did not mean you are buying it. I meant the fact you posted a picture of a modified Mini-14 and called it a assault weapon, when it fact it has no different capabilities than the original. However you think one is dangerous and one is not. They are the same weapon for all practical purposes.

I did not do that.

That's for you Penny.

[Boiler 45,434]

SMLE SMLE !

Dangerous looking?

I remember it kicked like a mule.

[Darnell 8,478]

ok - back at post #1 .

SONIC limits it to the picnic area - MOST folk sit in their cars and eat - so it's a non-issue for us.

CHILIs --?? no carry there? I supposed I could bring a good blade inside with no fuss - but that means leaving my pistol and whatnots in the car.... I'm sorta ok with that - except many of the wait-staff not seem to have 'armed-combatant training' so I am uncertain if they will get future business from us.

[Boiler 45,434]

Assuming you conceal carry not an issue, only open is a problem.

[Darnell 8,478]

duh - that's a no-brainer then - as we never OPEN CARRY.... Thanks for head-smacking me - I read that post #1 again.

Isn't OPEN CARRY already limited to only a few states? I remember something about Vermont being open-carry-ok...

[Boiler 45,434]

I thought Open Carry was theoretically legal everywhere.

Denver banned it, seems unconstitutional. You would need someone with deep pockets to fight it.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Some are. But I would not classify the AR-15 as the most deadly, so why all the huplla about it, as I pointed out earlier Glocks have been used in more mass killings. The Glock can hold 15 rounds. I can easily conceal several on my body. The round is more deadly.

So tell me why the liberals lose their mind over the AR-15. That is just one of the reasons we can't have meaningful gun reform, because the anti-gun crowd always leads with nonsense stuff that means nothing like mag capacity and assault weapons .

If they could lead with rational stuff like mandatory 100% background checks, which i favor, we might get somewhere. However they dump millions into the NRA and send people to the gun stores in Mass, by wanting to do absurd stuff like ban AR=15s . limit ammo, and ban certain magazines.

I'm a liberal. And an Elite one at that. I own an AR-15. I'm a responsible gun owner and supporter of the Second Amendment. Assault rifles were used in the killing of about 225 people last year. What was the handgun number, about 9000? Now if I was anti gun and wanted to get rid of the guns that are most likely to be used to commit murder, which would I chose, assault rifles or handguns? This kinda reminds me of this:

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

ok - back at post #1 .

SONIC limits it to the picnic area - MOST folk sit in their cars and eat - so it's a non-issue for us.

CHILIs --?? no carry there? I supposed I could bring a good blade inside with no fuss - but that means leaving my pistol and whatnots in the car.... I'm sorta ok with that - except many of the wait-staff not seem to have 'armed-combatant training' so I am uncertain if they will get future business from us.

Chili only banned open carry. Not a bad move INMHO

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

I'm a liberal. And an Elite one at that. I own an AR-15. I'm a responsible gun owner and supporter of the Second Amendment. Assault rifles were used in the killing of about 225 people last year. What was the handgun number, about 9000? Now if I was anti gun and wanted to get rid of the guns that are most likely to be used to commit murder, which would I chose, assault rifles or handguns? This kinda reminds me of this:

You would choose handguns

The term Liberal to describe anti-gun folks, is admittedly a little broad, I get your and Teddy's point. However generally speaking anti-gun people generally tend to be more liberal and more democrat, as in all things this is not always the case.

I do think it is accurate to describe Gun control as a liberal cause, just as it is accurate to describe anti-abortion as a Conservative cause, although not in every case

Edited June 2, 2014 by The Nature Boy

[GandD 5,966]

I thought Open Carry was theoretically legal everywhere.

So did I

[spookyturtle 9,465]

So the menacing looks of a weapon plays no roll in someone purchasing it? What is the purpose of purchasing a menacing looking weapon?

Why do people have German Shepards, Rottweilers or Dobermans for pets? Maybe because they are menacing looking? Or maybe because they like them? Maybe they like to show them? Enjoy interacting with them? Does being shot with a .223 from an AR-15 kill or hurt more than by the exact same round from a Ruger Mini-14? Questions to ponder.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

You would choose handguns

The term Liberal to describe anti-gun folks, is admittedly a little broad, I get your and Teddy's point. However generally speaking anti-gun people generally tend to be more liberal and more democrat, as in all things this is not always the case.

I do think it is accurate to describe Gun control as a liberal cause, just as it is accurate to describe anti-abortion as a Conservative cause, although not in every case

But I am not anti gun. I don't think banning assault rifles is going to put a dent in the murder rate. Most murders and crimes involve handguns, yet everyone want to ban assault weapons. I do own an AR-15.

[Sousuke 1,214]

So did I

Its not. Its illegally in CA.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Why do people have German Shepards, Rottweilers or Dobermans for pets? Maybe because they are menacing looking? Or maybe because they like them? Maybe they like to show them? Enjoy interacting with them? Does being shot with a .223 from an AR-15 kill or hurt more than by the exact same round from a Ruger Mini-14? Questions to ponder.

and that point is so clear and easy to understand..yet ??

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

But I am not anti gun. I don't think banning assault rifles is going to put a dent in the murder rate. Most murders and crimes involve handguns, yet everyone want to ban assault weapons. I do own an AR-15.

and that is exactly what I have been saying . If we want a serious discussion about reducing gun deaths in this country, the other side can not lead with banning funny looking guns, and limiting magazine sizes. All it does is prove to rational gun owners, they don't have a clue and want to push meaningless radical polices down our throat.

i would be fine with a reasonable way to do 100% back ground checks. Also would be ok with a mandatory firearms course to purchase your first weapon.

Here in GA you have to under go a hunting safety course to get a hunting licences and nobody's head exploded.