Scranton Times-Tribune attacks open carry rights again!

[Mike]

Looks like they want gun caerry to stay in the closet.
--
http://www.thetimes-tribune.com/site...d=418218&rfi=6

Big difference in right v. smart
05/21/2008

A small group of gun owners who decided to openly parade their hardware recently at a Dickson City buffet restaurant were out to prove that they had the right to do so. So, they know everything about their right, but nothing about wisely using it.

The gun-wielders became known to their activist brethren as the “Dickson Dozen” after someone in the restaurant complained to police that they openly were carrying their guns.

Police detained one of the armed diners and temporarily confiscated his weapon when he declined to answer their questions. So, the point was made. The Second Amendment provides the right to bear arms, and Pennsylvania has no law precluding citizens from openly brandishing the hardware. Moreover, the police were not quite sure about how to respond.

Yet having a right does not mean that it’s always smart to exercise it. Americans have broad free-speech rights, but it’s often smarter to hold one’s tongue for the sake of civil society — broadly, the accommodation of others. The gun-toters don’t seem to understand that not brandishing their weapons in public would not diminish their right while also not intimidating other diners.

Gun advocates insist, of course, that their open possession of handguns deters crime. One can only imagine the scene, however, if some incident occurs and the same police, who are now excoriated by the activists, arrive to find a dozen people with weapons drawn.

While the right cited by the activists is indeed rooted in the Constitution, the “wisdom” in exercising it at the buffet restaurant is a false premise rooted in bad judgment.

[kevinmch]

"brandishing their weapons in public" --That's nice. Apparently, this guy was there, but had the keen insight to see something no one else saw. From Dictionary.com:
Brandish
–verb (used with object)
1. to shake or wave, as a weapon; flourish:
Brandishing his sword, he rode into battle.

Apparently, then, the LEOs were "brandishing" their guns. Heck, I may be "brandishing" my mouse right now! Whoa...Word choice is so important that it is often taught in elementary school, or at least in SAT class.
Wrong
-adjective
Not fitting or suitable; inappropriate or improper: said the wrong thing.

[GunLawyer001]

It appears that we have the right to bear arms, but we shouldn't do it.

We have the right to remain silent, but we shouldn't do it.

We have the right to remain secure in our persons, but we shouldn't, you know, insist on it.

We have the right to be free of unreasonable searches, unless someone complains about our lawful activity.

It's very odd that the citizens are castigated for doing what they have a right to do, while the police are excused for doing that which they have no right to do. Unlawful searches, unlawful arrests, improper use of a gun "registry", suppression of lawful recording in a public place, compulsory fishing expeditions to see if they can find dirt on peaceful diners. Yet the media are bending over backwards to spin it. If only they would take the same view for interrogations of captured terrorists...

[normanvin]

They have the right to free speech, but the lack of common sense to use it wisely or impartially. some of the stories they have done on this topic was decent, but know they are reaching. It must not be the same reporter.

[Mike]

Has "Newspeak" become the official language of the Times-Tribune?

Newspeak, the emerging official language of Oceania in George Orwell's 1984, was invented "to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc . . . [and] to make all other modes of thought impossible." [George Orwell, 1984 298-299 (Signet Classic 1950) (1949).]

Too bad Newspeak has taken root in Scranton.

[DarthJoe]

You know, this writer does bring up a valid point. Imagine, not exercising rights just for the sake of "civility"! Where was this guy when Rosa Parks (in a most uncivilized manner) stood up for her right to sit on the bus? And the founding fathers? Complete wacko's for wanting to be free from the tyranny of England! How uncivilized was that pesky American Revolution?!?! Let's all just sit back like good little sheeple and not make any waves...what's the worst that could happen?

Incase nobody can tell...I'm being sarcastic.

[jerkin]

Could someone explain to me why virtually all of the media is slanted so far left? I have read the entire OCB thread and not once did I see a report from a mainstream media source that mentions anything about the police trampling the rights of law abiding citizens wilfully and purposely. Every report makes it out to be a bunch of gun nuts getting their just desserts.

I'm not a fool and have realized since I was a teenager that the media is left wing, but my question is why. Of the tens of thousands of media outlets in this country how can it be that 99% of them share the same liberal views? It seems almost impossible that all of those people could share the same opinions on not only guns but many other controversial subjects as well.

[angus]

The use of language and rhetoric is so transparent here, yet the media tend to do it all the time. Note the use of words such as "toting," "parading," "wielding." One can as well call the efforts of reporters (or "hacks") as "scrawling" rather than writing, or "spewing" rather than reporting.

I also find it interesting that the standard of exercising a right is now up to some amorphous and unidentifiable consensus of "civility" rather than an inherent recognition of natural human freedoms.

Gun advocates insist, of course, that their open possession of handguns deters crime.

Maybe some do, but most arguments I hear involve Constitutional freedoms and natural law elements of self-defense.

One can only imagine the scene, however, if some incident occurs and the same police, who are now excoriated by the activists, arrive to find a dozen people with weapons drawn.

In what context? On whom? A bad guy? The police? Can you detect the difference?

"One can imagine" the clusterfuckery of a scene in which the police arrive and found a restaurant being taken over by aliens, but that didn't happen either.

Yet having a right does not mean that it’s always smart to exercise it. Americans have broad free-speech rights, but it’s often smarter to hold one’s tongue for the sake of civil society — broadly, the accommodation of others.

So we both agree that you should stop and shut up now? I find your militant ignorance offensive and feel unaccommodated.

[Pa. Patriot]

The worst part about this article is the "brandishing" reference.

It implies, no, actually states, that something that was not going on, was.

No one Brandished any firearms, per the definition.

Since this misleading of the reader was intentional it is called lying. Irresponsible journalism at it's worst.

[larrymeyer]

Originally Posted by Pa. Patriot

The worst part about this article is the "brandishing" reference.

It implies, no, actually states, that something that was not going on, was.

No one Brandished any firearms, per the definition.

Since this misleading of the reader was intentional it is called lying. Irresponsible journalism at it's worst.

I don't think anyone took a gun out of the hostler till the police ask for them !!