Uncle Punk

Mods pleease close this thread, we have sovled this problem and I am tired of typing. RVTPilot you could peel the burnt shin off of her and try some BBQ sauce, this would save you the stop on your way to the hospital.

Fuck you libtard, you can't be agnostic and sit on the fence pick a side and argue it you spineless malcontent.

This knowledge can only come from learning it by having your starter children burned up by an RVTPilot supporter. These people are mean and enjoy burning children but if he could RVTPilot would have his buddy Obama make fire illegal. It won't help because their supporters are baby killers and no law will stop them. I don't trust RVTPilot or Obama supporters.

Hey Chevysoldier, don't ever start a thread again with this much typing involved or I am going to smack you when I finally meet you.

Like I said the KTM they showed would be simple to defeat I haven't looked into what it would take to work around your bikes but I'm guessing about two minutes or less. Remember a thief doesn't care if they cause damage.

I understand your point here, but still feel that in order to carry a firearm into a public setting; you should have to maintain a certain level of competency. I do understand that instituting an unbiased system to qualify someone would be difficult, and you mention some reasons that I will get to later for their effect on this issue. For me however, it’s difficult to get past the idea of someone who clearly has no business OC'ing, or even CC'ing for whatever reason, and then punishing him after he has done irreparable damage to an otherwise innocent family. I don't want to come off as posing this person and guilty until proven innocent, but the damage done when that mistake takes place would very likely outweigh the liberties compromised for him. My point about maintaining a minimal level of competency is whose level do we use? We license people to drive a motor vehicle and yet thousands of people are killed by people who have passed a test. We as a society have chosen to accept the risks that others are not competent because of the benefits we receive from motor vehicles. I can think of no greater convenience in my life than my own self preservation. Testing me or others will not make us safer as a whole; my liberty to use a firearm for protection should not be subject to others discretion. Let’s say that I might be able to ride a motorcycle with a larger safety margin than you, should my skill level be used as a means to test you if your skills are not equal. We cannot make all people equal by educating them or testing them. You don't find them ambiguous because you are smarter than the average bear. You have taken it upon yourself to educate yourself on them in order to have the ability to CC. But if we have both gun owners and law enforcement questioning them and having difficulty understanding the aspects of them, then there is obviously some problems there. I am sure a good bit of it comes down to education, be it John Q. Gun owner taking the time to catch up on them, or law enforcement being properly trained. When it comes to the laws, I am not saying the answer is more laws, but simply more concise language so that the understanding is easier for all. My ability to understand or ignore laws does not mean my life has a greater value and deserves to be protected over anyone else’s. Alaska and Vermont have no restrictions on CC or OC other than federal regulations and there is not blood in the streets. I know we could go to those same laws without any additional or unique issues. Why you think the people of our state are not capable to defend themselves without additional regulations is beyond me especially when people from other states have the capacity to do so without testing. I carried before the cc laws were passed and no one was in danger of me causing them harm unless it was their intent to cause me harm first. How simple could it be no restrictions for law enforcement or a citizen to adhere to so all ambiguity is gone and no negative side effects because it has been done successfully. I don’t know where you are getting why you think it is necessary to regulate people because in my observations it hasn’t worked in fact it is quite the opposite. And I will go back and check my context, but I did not intend to imply nor do I think I said owning a gun makes one a social degenerate. In fact, I think that somewhere in my dialogue, I mentioned that while a gun is often the common denominator in an unfortunate event, it’s often not the single greatest factor in said event. And I did not say we don't have the capacity to own a firearm, but we are not born with the understanding of that responsibility of owning them, and simply giving someone the right to do so without any formal training is irresponsible citizenship. Law enforcement carries them and has had necessary training. You and I received training thanks to Uncle Sam, and you have continued yours in order to acquire your CCW permit. However, if I am not any safer from you for any reason while you carry then you would have no business carrying a weapon in public. What makes me safer, carrying a gun of my own? Only if I shoot you preemptively. Even if your weapon of choice is anything other than your gun, to arbitrarily attack someone is proof enough that you would have no business carrying something with the effective lethal capabilities of a firearm. And I know that one of the reasons you carry one is in the event that you would encounter someone in public acting out in that fashion, and if he's armed with anything less than a gun, one of the first "things you would think is "damn, I'm glad he didn't have a gun!" My statement about you not being any safer because I have a permit meant I was never a threat to you or anyone else with or without one. You did allude to thinking that as a species we are inherently violent or capable of causing harm to each other without knowing the consequences. I think this is incorrect not that it’s not true in some cases but as a whole people know what is required to get along in a civilized society. Again, Alaska and Vermont have proven that point and hopefully Arizona is close behind. I don't want your head exploding, especially if you have an LCD monitor. They need to be cleaned carefully. Again, you are not a good example here, because you have exercised proper judgment and have acquired significant enough training to justify carrying. But I don't think the ability to do so should just be handed out to anyone because they feel the need to defend themselves as an American. My father has a friend who is a paranoid schizophrenic. A loving soul and not unintelligent, yet completely terrified of his own shadow. Yet by being an American, he's entitled to carry a gun? Maybe the gun makes him feel safer from the shadows, but what happens when he decided to shoot up the shadows and hurts or kills an innocent bystander? So that man's right to carry a gun to potentially defend himself has now cost someone their life, or drastically altered it at least, when its preventable by not allowing him to become armed to that degree. Sure this might be a radical example, but how far is it from the point you are making with regard to not knowing what is truly in one's heart? My point is we shouldn’t judge someone based on what we think their capacity to do wrong is because we all have the potential to cause others harm, actions should be how we judge someone not our fear of them. And I can smell the comments coming about someone being able to kill with a hammer or crowbar...yada yada yada. True. But the maximum effective range of that device it usually arms length, maybe a few feet if the crackpot can throw it with any sort of accuracy. But a hammer does not have maximum effective range of 50 yards and travel with enough kinetic energy to explode a watermelon. Which is why I choose a firearm as a means or protection, I want to keep harm as far away from me as possible. I didn't feel as if you called my patriotism into question, but more to elaborate on the point you touched on, and there wasn't any offense taken. I think the Constitution is still a viable document and very necessary, but as our nation and society evolves, it must as well. Proof of this is the right to vote being extended to women and minorities, which at that time was long overdue. There wasn't conflict for me with the document in as much as I knew that I would be defending the right of Americans to abuse those liberties, and that was disheartening to say the least. You and I took up the fight to allow Americans to burn their own flag or to demonstrate that a race can promote them greater than the race of a fellow American. Those things sadden me, but to put the kibosh on them then inhibits the rights and privileges of others. I do think the constitution is a living document that can be added to for protecting its people from the government but I trust what is already there and don’t find any wisdom in taking away rights that are already in it.

I am the authority in the means to which I choose to protect myself. My mental state is not your concern until I have done something wrong to cause harm to others. Denying someone the opportunity to defend their life because they have the potential to cause others harm is too restrictive and fraught with the potential for abuse. Racially, socially and culturally are just a few with many, many more, I don’t want a higher authority to judge anyone on their potential to do wrong; I want it to be for actually doing something wrong. I could just as well use a hammer to abuse another if I were so inclined so the tool I choose to use makes little difference. I do hate any of the gun laws we have but I don’t find them to be ambiguous. I know when I am carrying legally and illegally, adding another layer of bureaucracy won’t help to make the laws easier to understand or make us safer from those who would abuse a firearm. The possession of a firearm doesn’t turn anyone into a social degenerate, by percentages we have few gun related deaths compared to ownership, I hate to use this as an argument though because to tries to place the gun at blame which it clearly is not. I find it very hard to swallow your statement that our species and sociological state is such that we don’t have the capacity to responsibly own firearms. Law enforcement carry them along with millions of other people, I carry one and you are not any safer from me causing you harm because I have gone through higher authority to do so and I am sure that standard applies to the millions of others who carry. You are trying to make my head explode by saying there is someone who knows better than me how aggressive I am to defend myself. I like to be prepared for situations and in most cases I am over prepared, this doesn’t mean I need to use the full capacity of how I am prepared. I don’t pull off a perfectly good tire just because I have a spare; I won’t shoot fifteen times when three will do. My ability to apply discretion is immeasurable along with anyone else’s, again find fault if they have abused it don’t try to define it. Judging someone not capable is arbitrary, punitive and is not the place of government as a preemptive strike for their potential to cause harm. We are all capable of that and no man can determine what is in our hearts. I wasn’t calling out your patriotism when I made that statement and regret you took it as such. I find the constitution to be a wise document with much foresight that I don’t take exception to, so defending it wasn’t a conflict for me. I believe in the people it protects more so than the instrument of a government, so my inclination is to trust them to do the right thing with their freedoms and punish them if they are abused not to regulate them to my comfort level.

No experience, but don't need any, bike can be picked up and taken away. I went to their site and the KTM demo they gave would be a 30 second work around. Unless you have the one that is integrated I would expect yours has a simple work around too, especially being such a desirable bike.

http://www.agingrebel.com/?p=2128 That is the first link I came upon. I know there is a better one but I couldn't find it quickly.

Damn, I never would have thought this subject would have been a topic with this much discussion on this board. I think its cool and find all the replies interesting. I think chevysoldier should open carry any time he feels like it but he should be better prepared for the confrontations. When he posts them I would hope he would be more sincere about expecting a confrontation and just state them as a matter of fact rather than can you believe what happened to me in a situation I created. The voice recorder is a very good idea to protect himself from LEO who would learn of the laws after they have abused their power by harassing him and possibly change their story to protect themselves. Chevysolder is correct about no one being able to state for a fact about the tactical superiority of one method over the other. I open carry occasionally but only when I am by myself. If I am with family I don't want any extra attention on me or them until I can provide them with cover and concealment. When I am by myself I do think there are times when showing potential opposition would keep an undetermined bad guy from making a poor decision. I don’t think one method is superior over another and it is a personal choice based on the sum of one’s life experiences and education up to that point. I don't think LEO has the right to check out anyone who is carrying a gun nor should they. If a dispatcher takes a call from someone about a man with a gun they should ask them if the gun is holstered or is the person doing anything illegal, if not it should be a non event and no one should be harassed. If a LEO wants to drive by and take a look I wouldn't take issue with that but if the person isn't doing anything illegal they should be left alone. Carrying a holstered weapon and brandishing one are two different scenarios and should be handled differently. No one should be subject to a challenge while going about their business in a perfectly legal manor weather you like what they are doing or not. Every person should have the right to protect them self by virtue of being born, period, regardless of where they are born. The manner in which they chose is not up to the rest of us as long as it doesn't put the rest of us at risk. We don't have the right to decide who is qualified to defend themselves unless they have caused others harm in doing so. I am disappointed in RVTPilots view on that subject and can't imagine someone thinking otherwise especially when they have sworn to uphold the constitution. Protecting me is not a privilege it is a right that no man can take away. While some subjects we discuss here I might be able to be swayed from my original stand this is one I am sure you cannot convince me that my self preservation is a privilege and not a right.

I carry everywhere I go except where prohibited by law. Where I grocery shop at there are not any signs about guns. 100% of the establishments I go to could post a no guns sign and that won't change where I carry. I do believe they have the right to post the sign on private property but by doing so they don't turn me into a criminal. If ever asked to leave I will never return but that hasn't happened yet and I don't expect it to. The guy presented you with an incorrect policy and you should have known that going in was my point earlier. Exercising your right is fine but I don't feel the need to educate everyone around me about all the laws I find valuable especially when no one is actively trying to change them. I think the drunken driving laws are fine but I am not going out with the MADD crowd to tell everyone about them.

They can require you to wear purple socks if they want to but why would they? I do not understand your expectation of them making up their own rules. They can make up all kinds of rules however dumb we find them to be. Information on their store policies is readily available and if you are going to fight the cause you should know your enemy better, unless you expect to lose. If being approached with force throws you off of your game you should be studied more to give yourself a firmer standing in your resolve. I admire your youthful idealistic exuberance with wanting to educate the masses and I agree the fight shouldn't need fighting. I don't want to interact with that many people out in public, especially people who don't share my same views and values. If I were to see you carrying you would get zero reaction from me but you can expect to get a reaction from people who most likely aren't going to have their minds changed, I really don't need them wasting my time. If they were actively trying to change the open carry laws that might be a different story but it's a constitutionally protected right in the state of Ohio so I'm not going to fight a fight that isn't there because open carry isn't going away nor is anyone trying to take it away at this time. Just because others don't agree or like the fact that you open carry doesn't mean they need learning to see your way of thinking, if that's the case why don't you go around and educate them in other views you have. I carry owb and don't care if anyone can tell if I'm carrying. I will also open carry if it's convenient for me but I don't try to confront anyone nor will I allow them to confront me in a forceful manor without resistance in kind. Law enforcement is different and I am fairly confident I comply with the laws whether they know them or not so those potential confrontations don't worry me.

That's funny

I would expect to see them win their case against the city. They fought the federal government and won the right to keep their logo, which was no small task and that case didn't appear to be as solid in their favor as this one.

I would have never showed him my license or expected him to know the law. You should have expected to be confronted when exercising your right to fix the problem and not have been thrown for a loop. To fain indignation at a situation you create is a little whiney and disingenuous because I am sure this treatment could have been foreseen especially since you feel the need to fix a problem. Good luck with that, there is an overabundance of ignorant out there and plenty more being created all the time. While it might be a noble endeavor you will find it to be a never-ending uphill battle that can only put your family in jeopardy if you don't have a better plan while going into it. You can't be charged with inducing panic while conducting yourself in a legal manor or you have a good chance to win some money from the government coffers. This is not to say you won't be harassed by the ignorant but if you are legal you don't need to worry. In some neighborhoods if you walk down the street wearing a bandana and dew rag with your pants hanging around your thighs you could be inducing panic but you can't be charged with it because you are behaving in a perfectly legal manor.

Thanks and getting to ride 255 was a nice present, you guys are so good to me.

The closure on 255 makes the road that much better to ride because there is very little traffic on it. It will reopen July 8th but like Tpoppa stated is passable with a motorcycle at this time. 536 is sharper and hillier with shittier pavement compared to 255, if you've never ridden it and you're in the area it's worth a look at but I could never ride it again and not miss it. 536 is about 11 miles compared to 255 being 18 miles and 536 is more of a workout.

I am home safe, thanks for planning this, I had a great time. Thank everyone else for indulging me and agreeing to ad the extra 40 miles so we could do 255, I love that road. 420 miles for me and I enjoyed it all, three of us swapped lead when ever we got to a road we liked it couldn't have worked out better. I'm going to go eat and take a nap.

Thanks, fuckhead you don't need to remind me. By the way the last one of the speeders was found guilty also. In fact I see him lurking right now and I think he should be sick tomorrow so he can ride with us.

Highly doubtfull he will probably hit 83 in Lodi off 71

Ruth's Chris Steak House

http://www.ohio-riders.com/showpost.php?p=253184&postcount=1

WTF, you aren't meeting me in Eaton? It's not a big deal but if not I don’t have to go there and I can vary my start time.

I just got in from posing up at bike night. Yes, I will be there by 10:00 Its 58 miles from 82 & 83 and it usually takes about 1:10 to get to the Speedway in Millersburg from there. I am planning to leave at 8:30, this will give time to fill up, use the restroom with some time left over for whatever can and will happen.