St Mary's is NOT gun friendly

[Bunnykid68]

Can I touch it? I have candy.

Do you have a puppy too?

 

[Hotdoger]

1}you say he was a police officer.was in in uniform?
if yes the way i see it he did not need to.
at that time you should have showed your permit
not asked if you were detained. then it probably would not have escalated
thats my

What is a "permit"?

When the cop asked for his ID he was breaking the law. Why comply with his unlawful request?

 

[ljadayton]

All I'm saying is that if you take the short drive across state lines into IL you have no right to defensively carry a firearm, it is a privelesge to be allowed to carry. I wasn't saying that these actions alone got some politician riled up, but that voters who may have leaned towards gun rights may be more apt to vote against gun owners when they encounter situations like these. I'm certainly not going to walk down the street carrying a huge box of sudafed wearing an "I heart Meth" t-shirt and expect that no LEO's will go out of their way to talk to me, it just comes with the territory of drawing needless attention to yourself. ( just to clear up for the ones that take everything so litterally here I'm not likening legal gun owner to meth cooks, just making a point here: kind of ridiculous I even have to explain but I've already had some of the fine folks here doing this type of thing). Read the whole thing people don't just pick and choose a couple words here and there and add your own context!

rmabrey and ATM both beat me on this. Damn sleep. Carrying a gun (legally) is being compared to being a meth head? WTF? Are you reading what you're typing before you hit send? I can wear all the I LOVE guns crap I want. Why? Because it's a RIGHT to own a gun and I can legally carry a gun almost everywhere I go. It's a right, NOT a privilege. AND, he didn't cause the situation to occur through any action of his own. NOTHING posted, not in an "illegal" no gun zone equals he could have told the security guard to pound sand. Instead he handled the situation as well as if not better then anyone I've seen post similar situations on here.

I would like to take this opportunity to welcome Paul Blart to our forum.

My van is big, I have all kinds.

Do you have Mounds? I love me some chocolate and coconut

Do you have a puppy too?

say yes, say yes, say yes, pppplllleeeeaaassseeeee?

 

[WillyUSMC]

I guess the fact that you cannot carry a firearm everywhere you go in the US is irrelevant somehow. Also if an LTCH is a right, why must you apply, go through backround investigation, be fingerprinted, prove that you are mentally competant to posses a handgun, be fingerprinted, show the permit to LEO's and other appropriate authorities, and are able to have that license revoked? If you don't have a permit you do not posses the right to carry in our state plain and simple. If you do not have a LTCH then are still allowed to own firearms, but cannot legally carry them OC or CC. What other "Constitutional Rights" do you have to have a valid permit for? Agian like I said in my last post and apparently I didn't go into to enough detail, I'm not comparing gun owners to meth heads....only the issue of unnecessary attention. Sudafed and anything I put on a t-shirt is perfectly legal (because I have a valid freedom of speech permit). My point was that drawing the attention to yourself ( in the OP's case by not complying with the security and police officer) and then being upset that it caused a scene. Sometimes you have to ask does the good outweigh the bad. OP chose to stnad uip for his rights, and was in turn challenegd by officers trying to sort things out, if the path of resistance he chose causes "a huge scene" or some type of embarrassment, then thats the outcome, whereas the path of less resistance may have avoided the whole scene to begin with.... I can't believe that things have to be broken down barney style every time for some people.

 

[indytechnerd]

Again, you miss the point.....

I guess the fact that you cannot carry a firearm everywhere you go in the US is irrelevant somehow.
The Constitution codified a right that existed before our country was formed, the right to keep and bear arms. Arguably, that means unrestricted (or infringed) carry. That's the starting point.

Also if an LTCH is a right[It's not, it's an infringement], why must you apply[infringement], go through background investigation[infringement], be fingerprinted[infringement], prove that you are mentally competent to posses a handgun[infringement], be fingerprinted[infringement], show the permit to LEO's and other appropriate authorities[infringement], and are able to have that license revoked[infringement]?See a pattern here?
[STRIKE]If you don't have a permit you do not posses the right to carry in our state plain and simple. If you do not have a LTCH then are still allowed to own firearms, but cannot legally carry them OC or CC. What other "Constitutional Rights" do you have to have a valid permit for? Again like I said in my last post and apparently I didn't go into to enough detail, I'm not comparing gun owners to meth heads....only the issue of unnecessary attention. Sudafed and anything I put on a t-shirt is perfectly legal (because I have a valid freedom of speech permit).[/STRIKE]

My point was that drawing the attention to yourself ( in the OP's case by not complying with the security and police officer) How was he not complying? See Below. and then being upset that it caused a scene. Sometimes you have to ask does the good outweigh the bad. OP chose to stand up for his rights, and was in turn challenged by officers trying to sort things out
[What's to sort out? Security asks him to leave, he's leaving. The entire episode should be over at that point.]
, if the path of resistance he chose causes "a huge scene" or some type of embarrassment, then that's the outcome, whereas the path of less resistance[which path of less resistance would like like us to take? "Papiere, Bitte."] may have avoided the whole scene to begin with.... I can't believe that things have to be broken down barney style every time for some people.

He then told me I could give him the gun or leave, I looked at my wife who was done putting him up and asked her if she was ready and she said she was so I told the guard that I was leaving the building.

I'm ASS-U-ME'ing this portion of the OP's story is correct with this quote.

The more I read the more I'm convinced that folks are OK with little pinpricks as long as they don't get stabbed with the whole sword. Well F that! The OP complied with the initial request, or was trying to, and you're not F'ing happy because he didn't get down and kiss the jackboots. Here's some light reading... First they came, may your chains rest lightly.

 

[ATM]

...I can't believe that things have to be broken down barney style every time for some people.

If you weren't incorrect so frequently, barney style wouldn't be necessary.

The LTCH isn't a right nor are the other infringements you listed. Do you not understand that these measures you equate to privileges are actually restrictions? Some states do not restrict the right guaranteed by the 2A. Others, like Indiana, infringe upon that right but still leave a restricted means to carry. Others, like Illinois, completely trample the right.
But even the infringed or trampled right still exists.

I guess the OP drew attention to the fact that the security guard was incorrect regarding carry being illegal in the hospital, but was still leaving as instructed per their rule. The scene was caused by security and then the officer as they attempted to overstep their authority by demanding identification. They should have just let him leave.

Your path of least resistance has never secured a single right. On the contrary, it weakens them.

 

[EnochRoot43]

I guess the fact that you cannot carry a firearm everywhere you go in the US is irrelevant somehow. Also if an LTCH is a right, why must you apply, go through backround investigation, be fingerprinted, prove that you are mentally competant to posses a handgun, be fingerprinted, show the permit to LEO's and other appropriate authorities, and are able to have that license revoked? If you don't have a permit you do not posses the right to carry in our state plain and simple. ........ What other "Constitutional Rights" do you have to have a valid permit for? .......only the issue of unnecessary attention.......... Sometimes you have to ask does the good outweigh the bad........... if the path of resistance he chose causes "a huge scene" or some type of embarrassment, then thats the outcome, whereas the path of less resistance may have avoided the whole scene to begin with.... .

I think you might be confused. You think that a LTCH gives you the "right" to carry a handgun. It does not. It allows you the privilege of doing so.

What the gentlemen and ladies in this post, and commonly on this site, profess is that the RIGHT to possess a weapon is a NATURAL right. A right that man has at birth. Not because the beautiful U.S. Constitution affirms this Right, but because EVERY person is born with a Natural Right to defend their life, family, and rightful property however they see fit.

In short, a LTCH grants no rights, rather it is an instrument of infringement.

It is a new way of thinking about things, I understand this, but try to look at this entire thread through those new lenses and maybe you will see that none of this is about being a rabblerouser or being pridefully defiant.....it is about expecting authorities to at least follow the laws they are charged to enforce, and not overstep and deny man any more liberty than society and legislators determine permissible.

Next time you see a world map, try and find a country where mans natural right to defend himself is less infringed than the United States. I can't think of one, myself. Does that mean that we are "lucky" , and that we should just be happy with what we have? No! NO NONONO! Because every day, thousands of people wake up, have a cup of coffee and set out to do their life's work....DISARMING lawful citizens through sensationalistic fear mongering that leads to a "public outcry", resulting in the crafting of new laws that make it difficult for law abiding citizens to own, possess, and afford personal weapons. That is a "good day at work" for a whole bunch of people.

You obviously have strong opinions, but I gently encourage you to open your ears and your attitude to the big picture. We are all here because we enjoy something that is BANNED and DEMONIZED all around the world. Yet, we are generally an intelligent, loving, and peaceful bunch of Hoosiers.....so obviously the stereotypes and fear pushed on the public about the nature of gun owners is WRONG. So "f" not making waves, of always maintaining an attitude of compliance and submission.....because by letting YOUR natural right be grossly violated without protest, you only make it harder for the next guy, because YOU set a precedent of how the passive citizen should respond.

Just my......$2 <----(Sacagaweas)

 

[phatgemi]

I think most of you guys would argue about hanging a horsethief with a new rope. I know that in a strictly "proper" sense it does make a difference between calling it a right or a privilege or a infringement or whatever label you want to put on it. But in all practicality it's all the same. Some people are comfortable with drawing attention to themselves and dealing with those aspects and some are not. It doesn't make one right and the other wrong. Of course both are legal. Argue all you want and rationalize it however you want, but when you choose to confront authority then you have to deal with all that entails. It doesn't make it wrong but the fact is you will have to deal with it.

I've followed this thread from the beginning but can't remember (and don't want to go back thru it all) if the OP said whether or not he knew what hospital policy was regarding carry.

 

[ljadayton]

...I know that in a strictly "proper" sense it does make a difference between calling it a right or a privilege or a infringement or whatever label you want to put on it. But in all practicality it's all the same. Some people are comfortable with drawing attention to themselves and dealing with those aspects and some are not. It doesn't make one right and the other wrong. Of course both are legal. Argue all you want and rationalize it however you want, but when you choose to confront authority then you have to deal with all that entails. It doesn't make it wrong but the fact is you will have to deal with it.

I've followed this thread from the beginning but can't remember (and don't want to go back thru it all) if the OP said whether or not he knew what hospital policy was regarding carry.

There IS a difference between a right and a privilege. A right is something ALL people are entitled to. The right of free speech, the right to freedom of religion, the right to protect ourselves. A privilege is something that is granted to certain people. The privilege to drive a car, (unfortunately) the privilege of marrying who we want (yes, I said unfortunately, I personally think that should be a right but that's not this thread). See the difference? I don't purposefully draw attention to myself. I've OCd exactly ONCE in well over 5 years of gun ownership. HOWEVER, I know what my RIGHTS are and I enjoy the OPTION of exercising them as I see fit. The OP did NOT "draw attention" to himself and he didn't "confront" authority.

OP stated that there was nothing posted about carry.

... just against their non posted rules...

 

[Titanium_Frost]

I think most of you guys would argue about hanging a horsethief with a new rope. I know that in a strictly "proper" sense it does make a difference between calling it a right or a privilege or a infringement or whatever label you want to put on it. But in all practicality it's all the same. Some people are comfortable with drawing attention to themselves and dealing with those aspects and some are not. It doesn't make one right and the other wrong. Of course both are legal. Argue all you want and rationalize it however you want, but when you choose to confront authority then you have to deal with all that entails. It doesn't make it wrong but the fact is you will have to deal with it.

I've followed this thread from the beginning but can't remember (and don't want to go back thru it all) if the OP said whether or not he knew what hospital policy was regarding carry.

How would I know what their rules/policies are? They only have "no smoking" signs

 

[ljadayton]

How would I know what their rules/policies are? They only have "no smoking" signs

Your Jedi mind reading skills must need some work

 

[Titanium_Frost]

LMAO I wonder if my Lightsaber is banned as well?

 

[ljadayton]

LMAO I wonder if my Lightsaber is banned as well?

Is no weapons posted yet? You could tell them it's not a weapon, it's a flashlight

 

[youngda9]

LMAO I wonder if my Lightsaber is banned as well?

That is the last thing any woman in the labor and delivery area of the hospital wants to see. You're going to have to keep that holstered.

 

[Bunnykid68]

How would I know what their rules/policies are? They only have "no smoking" signs

I hate no smoking signs. I actually have one on my office door that simply says " SMOKING"

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Willy, tell your boss Keith that he needs to call me ASAP. I have been waiting for him to return my messages all week. If he wont talk to me then I will be forced to go over his head and I would rather keep this at the department level and hopefully they can take care of this issue.
Thanks,
your friend Ben

 

[Benny]

Good name.

 

[ljadayton]

Willy, tell your boss Keith that he needs to call me ASAP. I have been waiting for him to return my messages all week. If he wont talk to me then I will be forced to go over his head and I would rather keep this at the department level and hopefully they can take care of this issue.
Thanks,
your friend Ben

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Good name.

LOL you bet!

 

[ljadayton]

LOL you bet!

What would you have named a girl?