[smn]

The First Amendment contains the freedom-of-speech guarantee that the people ratified, which included exceptions for obscenity, libel, and disclosure of state secrets, but not for the expression of extremely unpopular and wrong headed views. The Second Amendment is no different.

Will this phrase come up in front of the judge?

 

[gunsmoker]

Nothing wrong with exercising your 2nd amendment rights while exercising your 1st.

...

And as the rest of your post states, being armed can make you seem like more of a threat to the other person you're confronting. THAT is where, in fact and in law, your GUN RIGHTS will serve to limit your FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, or, at your option, you can have your full 100% set of gun rights, but then you better what what you say, and thus your 1st Amendment free speech rights have taken a hit.

If I'm not armed, I can come up to you and get in your face and insult you with much stronger language, even wishing that you would die, than I could legally get away with if I did the same thing while openly carrying a gun. Especially a long gun that I'm holding in my hands.
Hate + Insults + Threats + Weapon = reasonable fear of imminent mortal danger.

 

[mrhutch]

And as the rest of your post states, being armed can make you seem like more of a threat to the other person you're confronting. THAT is where, in fact and in law, your GUN RIGHTS will serve to limit your FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, or, at your option, you can have your full 100% set of gun rights, but then you better what what you say, and thus your 1st Amendment free speech rights have taken a hit.

If I'm not armed, I can come up to you and get in your face and insult you with much stronger language, even wishing that you would die, than I could legally get away with if I did the same thing while openly carrying a gun. Especially a long gun that I'm holding in my hands.
Hate + Insults + Threats + Weapon = reasonable fear of imminent mortal danger.

But first amendment rights are for peaceable assembly. Armed or not, you have no right to scream in someone's face or force your views down their throat. Both black panthers and patriot groups have gathered in opposition while armed and those protests were far more peaceful than unarmed protests. An Armed society is a polite society.

 

[moe mensale]

However, if you're blocking traffic while holding a gun, you have just become a threat to all who wish to pass and you are now a public menace. Stand in front of my car in a protest line with a gun trying to tell me I can't go somewhere and you'll be getting shot, as i interpret your refusal to let me pass while you brandish a weapon to be a threat against my life.

Holding a weapon does not necessarily equate with brandishing. Would you consider a slung or holstered weapon a threat to you? Many long guns aren't equipped with slings so the owners have to hold them in their hands. That's not brandishing.

If I'm not armed, I can come up to you and get in your face and insult you with much stronger language, even wishing that you would die, than I could legally get away with if I did the same thing while openly carrying a gun. Especially a long gun that I'm holding in my hands.
Hate + Insults + Threats + Weapon = reasonable fear of imminent mortal danger.

A weapon isn't required for there to be a reasonable fear of imminent mortal danger. Haven't you seen the tactics that antifa, etc use? One of them will get in your face but there's usually several more right there for moral support. Tell me that isn't imminent mortal danger.

 

[mrhutch]

Holding a weapon does not necessarily equate with brandishing. Would you consider a slung or holstered weapon a threat to you? Many long guns aren't equipped with slings so the owners have to hold them in their hands. That's not brandishing.

If you are going to carry a rifle in public, it is no less irresponsible to not have a sling for it than it is to carry around a handgun in your hand instead of a holster. I agree, there is a big difference between someone with a rifle slung over their back or a holstered handgun and someone with the gun in their hands. If a weapon is in your hand, it shows intent to use it. Especially in a situation where you are part of a group intimidating or forcing others to comply with your demands.

 

[etbob9]

If you are going to carry a rifle in public, it is no less irresponsible to not have a sling for it than it is to carry around a handgun in your hand instead of a holster. I agree, there is a big difference between someone with a rifle slung over their back or a holstered handgun and someone with the gun in their hands. If a weapon is in your hand, it shows intent to use it. Especially in a situation where you are part of a group intimidating or forcing others to comply with your demands.

Are you saying that it's not legal to carry a handgun in your hand, if you are not intentionally pointing it at or obviously threatening someone with it? Please cite the Georgia statutes that prohibit this method of carry in unrestricted areas. (Except on college campuses)

 

[mrhutch]

Are you saying that it's not legal to carry a handgun in your hand, if you are not intentionally pointing it at or obviously threatening someone with it? Please cite the Georgia statutes that prohibit this method of carry in unrestricted areas. (Except on college campuses)

I said irresponsible, I didn't say illegal.
Having a gun in hand will get you in trouble regardless of whether you get sentenced or not. Go ahead, walk around Wal-Mart with a Glock in your hand. See what happens. If you are part of a crowd that is swarming a vehicle and you are holding a gun in your hand while pushing on the bumper with the other, you are threatening the driver of the car.

 

[etbob9]

I said irresponsible, I didn't say illegal.
Having a gun in hand will get you in trouble regardless of whether you get sentenced or not. Go ahead, walk around Wal-Mart with a Glock in your hand. See what happens. If you are part of a crowd that is swarming a vehicle and you are holding a gun in your hand while pushing on the bumper with the other, you are threatening the driver of the car.

You can also, at least, be inconvenienced in any place of business with it in a holster, depending on who gets excited about it. You may be asked to leave Walmart, if they so desire, and if you don't leave you may get in trouble. I am totally against any deliberate confrontation with anyone if you are carrying any weapon or threatening implement openly. The liberal thugs who run around with their rifles, bats, pick handles or whatever in a demanding or confrontational manner are likely to have others ready to join in when an unsuspecting prey (usually an unarmed conservative) is spotted. For some reason, unfortunately, in many cases, law enforcement looks the other way until someone is hurt or killed. I think most of the thugs aren't armed with guns because they probably have some felony, domestic violence or other charges/convictions and can't legally buy or even legally possess one.

I don't make it a practice to walk around in public with a firearm of any type in my hand.
I also try to avoid all hostile confrontations, but I am almost always carrying a concealed handgun and try to be aware of my surroundings.