I don’t do hypotheticals with the hallucinatory.

Get help.

Ummmm – Elwood – Need I remind you that YOU’RE the one that suggested that the cops simply gun down EVERYONE involved in the hypothetical scenario – see #8 ???

Try to stay focussed and on point, could you ?

Remember . . . ?

The original point YOU made was that cops CAN differentiate good guys from bad . . . but it seems like YOU can’t accurately make such a distinction within the context of a simply hypothetical discussion – SO HOW THE hell would you expect cops to make a distinction in a real fire fight ???

LOL ! ! ! ! !!

You are obviously hallucinating badly.

Get help.

“There ain’t no good guys in a gangbanger gun battle.

If the cops come across four or five morons in a gun battle, I suggest killing them all and let God sort them out.”

Except in *this* particular gun battle – 1/2 the involved parties were “open carry” advocates “defending” themselves and the other 1/2 were the “gangbangers” – -

And, according to our resident originator of useless anecdote backed by sound-bite reasonining the cops could simply send them all off to get planted six feet under.

Congratulations Elwood !

You just failed one of the most basic of scenarios in officer training . . . .

Appreciate everybody’s spirited comments. I’m obviously out-gunned here, so to speak. Nothing I say will convince you, and vice versa. So, for my part, I’m calling it a day on this topic in this venue. As for the “you people” referenced by “For Liberty,” poor choice of words on my part. My bad. Please don’t shoot.

Would this be the conspiracy involving Obama that you may be referring to (see the link to the below listed article)?:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/aug/19/our-firearm-freedoms-are-not-negotiable/

What do you mean, “you people”? Those rights that you so freely don’t mind giving away are yours, just as much as they are mine.

There is already in place, sufficient laws in CA regarding the carrying of firearms. For example: Penal Code (PC) 12031 (a)(1) = finds a person “guilty of carrying a loaded firearm when he or she carries a loaded firearm on his or her person or in a vehicle while in any public place or on any public street in an incorporated city or in any public place or on any public street in a prohibited area of unincorporated territory.”

PC 171e = provides any police officer the authority to inspect any gun being carried by a person/s while in public. The section reads, “In order to determine whether or not a firearm is loaded…..peace officers are authorized to examine any firearm carried by anyone on his person or in a vehicle while in any place or on the grounds of any place in or on which the possession of a loaded firearm is prohibited. Refusal to allow a peace officer to inspect a firearm pursuant to the provisions of this section constitutes probable cause for arrest for violation of Section 171c or 171d.”

These above mentioned laws, already in place in the CA Penal Code, provide sufficient enforcement tools if needed against the scary “Open Carry” guys and gals who hang out at Starbucks on a Saturday morning. Those laws allow the police to walk right up to them, request an inspection. Any guns found loaded could result in an arrest. Any refusal for inspection could result in an arrest. Incident to any lawful arrest, the guns will be inspected and confiscated.

Your fast food parking lot example conveys that this law will provide you a sense of security. Again, please understand that we will have neither (security or liberty). Those laws quoted above provide the security that you are looking for. It does not appear that this new proposed legislation, if passed. is going to provide us any more security than what’s already in place.

And what does this CA state proposed legislation have to do with a conspiracy against Obama?

I’d estimate that it’s about 100 times more likely that he’d just kick your ass.