EAA bans guns at OSH

Right. I thought you did.
 
Last edited:
A citizen who legally carries concealed weapons is likely to be much more resonable than an Oxy addict who wants to rob a drug store (for example). Imagine the irony had the Long Island incident ended with a sweet old elderly lady shooting the perp with a pistol she keeps in her purse. Of course, that doesn't happen on Long Island, but it could in say, Georgia.:dunno: Now, if I went to the drug store to pick up my mother's script, it would be about the last place I would expect to be confronted with such a situation, and by the logic of many people, including some on this thread, it would be a silly idea to carry while thumping chest because it's a right we have in this country. Given the unfortunate event that really did happen however, it may not have been such a bad idea. Same goes for the VA Tech shooting. A college environment should be safe, and every student who went to school there was under the impression that such was the case, right up until the loony started shooting.
No, this is NOT a war zone. If it was we would all be wearing body armor or living in refugee camps or barricaded in our homes. Bad things happen every day, and it simply is not possible to know when or where it will happen again; if that were possible we would have a LOT more police officers handling it. They simply cannot be everywhere all the time, and crimes can escalate within seconds with or without intervention with mouth, hand, feet (i.e. running away), knife, bat, car, or gun. No reasonable person carries ignorant to what will happen even if they do survive the incident. There will be questions, and you will have to answer for your actions, but you might not otherwise be alive (or worse, ABLE) to do so.


Henning said:
:confused::confused::confused: You mean the sports we teach to build and maintain shooting proficiency so when the time comes we have the ability to kill someone?
If it wasn't for the preparing to kill part, you can replace guns with darts, and you don't need a firearm either, a BB gun would be fine for target shooting.

There is one purpose for a firearm, death and destruction. Were it not for death and destruction, firearms would have never been invented. All firearm sports are about proficiency in the use of a tool that is designed for only one purpose, to kill whatever it is you aim at.

To try to argue otherwise is kinda lame and counters any sensible arguments you may have.
Click to expand...
Not for sniper golf, unless you know of a BB gun capable of hitting 4"x14" targets at 800yards, or 30"x40" at 1200 yards.
BB guns won't fare so well at 3-gun either.
Plinking soda cans in the back yard, sure.
 
airbornejohnny said:
A citizen who legally carries concealed weapons is likely to be much more resonable than an Oxy addict who wants to rob a drug store (for example).
Click to expand...
Not in my experience. I know of two who were unreasonable: one turned his weapon on himself; one turned mine on me. Both were adamant supporters of the 2nd amendment and spoke much like the supporters of the 2nd amendment on this board.
I've never been assaulted in any way by an Oxy addict. Have you?
I've never been physically assaulted by any addicts although I worked with them. I have been verbally threatened by some, though.
 
Last edited:
Your experience is limited to a sample size of two obviously disturbed individuals. Probably not going to be enough to change public policy.

I'm thinking that you may have to come to terms that they were both in need of counseling, and in the case of the one who turned your own weapon on you, no access to your weapon.

Let me guess. Alcohol was involved too. Am I right?
 
denverpilot said:
Your experience is limited to a sample size of two obviously disturbed individuals. Probably not going to be enough to change public policy.

I'm thinking that you may have to come to terms that they were both in need of counseling, and in the case of the one who turned your own weapon on you, no access to your weapon.

Let me guess. Alcohol was involved too. Am I right?
Click to expand...
No alcohol.
 
So, the broad assertion that "A citizen who legally carries concealed weapons is likely to be much more resonable than an Oxy addict who wants to rob a drug store (for example)." cannot be countered with a factual example because "you have to come to terms."

I really don't like getting into ad hominem arguments, so I will not further engage in whether I have to come to terms, nor whether you do. There is sufficient evidence that firearms do not belong in peaceful situations like the museum. This thread contains plenty of evidence that there are many pilots who do not want there to be guns on the grounds at OSH.
 
AuntPeggy said:
No alcohol.
Click to expand...

Pretty amazing, honestly. I've seen bad stuff go down when the alcohol is flowing.

So this otherwise model Citizen who threatened you with his/her/your(?) weapon did it only because they wanted to show off their 2nd Amendment rights, otherwise unprovoked?

I'm not buying it.

That's essentially the leap of logic you just asked us all to take. It just doesn't hold water.

The person was angry with you. Likely irrationally so.

Or... More likely, they knew they could frighten you, probably for manipulative and abusive reasons of their own.

My point is, and has been, that your experience with an angry wacko with zero self-control, who just happened to be holding a gun, isn't a logical reason to change public policy on gun ownership.

Take away the gun, the wacko would have just threatened you with something else. Or maybe they'd have just attempted to hurt you with their bare hands.

Murder-minded and/or abusive psychos aren't new in human history.

You have that picture of a gun in your head and want to make it the boogeyman. The real boogeyman is the face of the psycho who wanted to harm you, but it's easier to say it was the gun's fault and not face the truth.

It's not easy to say someone you knew and probably cared about, wanted to threaten you with death to get their way. The ultimate in selfish behavior.

Let's also get real. This person probably wanted you scared more than dead.

If they wanted you dead they'd have pulled the trigger and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

They wanted to manipulate your emotions.

Judging by your reaction to guns, they're still winning. You're not over it, or their behavior. Gun or no gun.

I'm really sorry that they did that to you. But I see no reason why it should affect your judgement of reasonable people who own a firearm or choose to carry it somewhere.

If I thought giving away my weapons would save the lives of people killed by weapons of all sorts, every day in my city, I'd do it. It won't make a lick of difference. Me carrying it around won't matter either, in all likelihood.

There's a ridiculously slim chance I could find myself in a situation to save someone's life, or my own with it.

There's also a chance I might drive a dying person to a hospital in my truck.

Neither are particularly likely.

The chances the person who threatened you would have done that anyway without a gun, is probably close to 100%.

I'm glad you're away from them. Or at least I hope you are. They'll do it again.
 
AuntPeggy said:
There is sufficient evidence that firearms do not belong in peaceful situations like the museum.
Click to expand...

Actually there's zero "evidence".

For all we know, hundreds of people walked that museum with concealed weapons.

You don't know, and I don't know. In fact, unless they installed metal detectors, there may still be scofflaws walking around staring at old airplanes with a gun in their pocket, signs or no signs.

You can't make up "evidence".
 
AuntPeggy said:
Not in my experience. I know of two who were unreasonable: one turned his weapon on himself; one turned mine on me. Both were adamant supporters of the 2nd amendment and spoke much like the supporters of the 2nd amendment on this board.
I've never been assaulted in any way by an Oxy addict. Have you?
I've never been physically assaulted by any addicts although I worked with them. I have been verbally threatened by some, though.
Click to expand...
AuntPeggy said:
So, the broad assertion that "A citizen who legally carries concealed weapons is likely to be much more resonable than an Oxy addict who wants to rob a drug store (for example)." cannot be countered with a factual example because "you have to come to terms."

I really don't like getting into ad hominem arguments, so I will not further engage in whether I have to come to terms, nor whether you do. There is sufficient evidence that firearms do not belong in peaceful situations like the museum. This thread contains plenty of evidence that there are many pilots who do not want there to be guns on the grounds at OSH.
Click to expand...

No, I have not been assaulted by an Oxy addict, I was referring to the attempted robbery on Long Island I am sure you must have heard about since I posted the link earlier in the thread, and because you are from New York or live in the area; it made the evening news. My point was that in other parts of the U.S. where citizens are issued concealed carry permits, the situation likely would have ended much differently, perhaps at the hands of a genuine Miss Daisy.
I won't get into all the times I have been preyed upon, but it's enough that I have some clue as to the sort of resolve it takes to survive, and any tool is worth its weight in gold in such a situation.
The people I know who carry concealed who did not wear any uniform let alone go off to another country surrounded by people who want to kill them (IOW, no Police or Military training), are very well educated of and take quite seriously the responsibility which comes along with what they carry in their pocket or on their hip, unnoticed by virtually anybody around them. Their attitude is what I refer to as "reasonable". They don't pull it like Elmer Fudd blasts away at the waskilwee wabbit, or like Yosemite Sam flips a breaker. They know the law, they respect it and they obey it, and they realize if heaven forbid they ever have to use that weapon their life may very well be in the hands of 12 "peers," which is better than their body being in the hands of six close friends and family.
 
AcroBoy said:
Yes, the tired old argument that guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Yet in other first world countries, like Western Europe, Canada, and Japan, gun related crime is virtually non-existent. The per capita rate of gun related injury and death is much higher in the United States than in these other countries- hardly a good rationale for increased numbers and unregulated guns.
.
Click to expand...

Yeah the criminals just beat their victims to death instead.
 
God made all men, Sam Colt made the equal, and here in America we strive for equality...
 
A 50 year old white man is on life support after black teens beat him with a hammer... in the same city as the Treyvon Martin case.

No mass media. No need for a national discussion on race.

Pulled him from his car, one held him, the other beat him in the head with a hammer. Witnesses heard him screaming for help.

Not a single news article on NBC.

Where's Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, raising money and peeing their pants to go on TV? No Twitter tags. No Facebook posts of outrage. Nothing at all.

It's not newsworthy.
 
Sadly, we have a huge double standard in the media, with community activists, and politicians when it comes to these issues. :(

BTW, NBC recently released an apology for their bias in editing the coverage on Zimmerman, specifrically the 911 tape.
 
Last edited:
denverpilot said:
A 50 year old white man is on life support after black teens beat him with a hammer... in the same city as the Treyvon Martin case.

No mass media. No need for a national discussion on race.

Pulled him from his car, one held him, the other beat him in the head with a hammer. Witnesses heard him screaming for help.

Not a single news article on NBC.

Where's Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, raising money and peeing their pants to go on TV? No Twitter tags. No Facebook posts of outrage. Nothing at all.

It's not newsworthy.
Click to expand...
Anthony said:
Sadly, we have a huge double standard in the media, with community activists, and politicians when it comes to these issues. :(
Click to expand...
You are not in Spin Zone.

Here is what is different:

The two suspects face charges of attempted first-degree murder, burglary with assault or battery and armed burglary.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Yeah this is definitely SZ material. I'm out. Ain't turning on SZ again.
 
I'm 1600 or so miles away from OSH. Enjoyed the show before. Won't chance the trip again if we go down unarmed.
We'll spend our money elsewhere.
 
fnpdoc said:
Good one. While we are at it.
Why do we need a gun at church?
How about at school?
How about at a hospital or maybe a mall?
Click to expand...

I am perhaps not the best one to ask. I don't feel the need for a firearm in any of those venues. The only time I've ever felt even a twinge of a need for a firearm I was in very dangerous situations of my own making.

Oshkosh is a wonderful family oriented gathering of some of the best people on Earth. I go every year and sleep on the ground. I genuinely cannot fathom why anyone would feel the need for a firearm.
 
steingar said:
I am perhaps not the best one to ask. I don't feel the need for a firearm in any of those venues. The only time I've ever felt even a twinge of a need for a firearm I was in very dangerous situations of my own making.

Oshkosh is a wonderful family oriented gathering of some of the best people on Earth. I go every year and sleep on the ground. I genuinely cannot fathom why anyone would feel the need for a firearm.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. OSH is probably statistically the safest place on the planet, if you can avoid the whirling ginsu knives.
 
Tom-D said:
This is from there EAA Forums:
Why I won't be back to Oshkosh
I have learned that EAA has posted it's museum "no weapons".

Besides opening themselves up to lawsuits by posting if something happens (act 35 gives those who DON'T post immunity from such lawsuits), it is an insult to the law abiding citizens of Wisconsin.

They can claim all sorts of things, probably all of them have the word "safety" in there.

The fact is, I went through training, a background check, paid a $50 fee. Why they think criminals will go through all this, or even obey the sign, is beyond me.

I know that airventure rules have said for years no weapons on premises, but with the passing of act 35, this rule opens them up to all kinds of liability, and presumes criminality on the part of members and the public.


Your thoughts????
Click to expand...

They going to have metal detectors? If not, they are only banning guns of honest people.
 
This is a hideous, dick move by EAA but I'm not going to turn my new card in just yet. I'll just keep this grudge until that time something else happens. Also, I'm going to verify that they are actually doing this. One post by Tom does not qualify. Of course, I'm going to avoid the show if signs are actually up. Conventiently I wasn't going this year, which gives me an extra year to sort it out.
 
So would you want one if you happened to be at the places like those where they had shootings or knife attacks?

steingar said:
I am perhaps not the best one to ask. I don't feel the need for a firearm in any of those venues. The only time I've ever felt even a twinge of a need for a firearm I was in very dangerous situations of my own making.

Oshkosh is a wonderful family oriented gathering of some of the best people on Earth. I go every year and sleep on the ground. I genuinely cannot fathom why anyone would feel the need for a firearm.
Click to expand...
 
Someone revived this dead thread... wow... and there's my post saying I wouldn't turn on SZ ever again... LOL... crap... busted.

An interesting point: EAA banned firearms from the museum. The rest of the event would probably fall under Wisconsin's "Special Event" law, which states signage must be posted at "every entrance" to the event in order to ban firearms from the event.

Even trickier: Wisconsin has a specific carve-out of the "Special Event" law that says if the firearm was "driven" to the location and remains in the "parking lot" that's okay, even IF the Special Event is posted as not allowing arms.

So... is the North-40 a "Parking Lot"? Are the entrances to it, clearly marked as not allowing firearms? Heh...

I don't really care... I just thought I'd toss the legal beagle BS out there for the crowd to mull over. The reality is, all the folks waxing poetically about how wonderful OSH is, and yes... it really really is that wonderful... probably also slept within a few hundred feet of at least one firearm in the North-40, probably many more.

'Cause hard-core concealed carry folk, carry all the time, and make sure no one knows they have it. It's just like putting on their pants in the morning. Damned hard to do in hot weather and light clothing. Additionally, there's a sub-set of folks who'd just have it in a lockbox in their aircraft.

(For the record, I don't even answer the question of whether or not I have a permit... that's for me to know, and you to find out the hard way.)

The "EDC" crowd, or "Everyday Carry" does make for some entertaining reading sometimes, though. The only folks more committed to personal freedom are the "EDOC" crowd... Everyday Open Carry... those folk are fun to watch. Especially when they shoot -- no pun intended -- video.

Flying GA and concealing would be tricky in the modern legal world of concealed carry law, since you could land in a State along the way that doesn't recognize your State's permits. And then there's the varying language specific to airports in most State laws, which usually reads something like "Can't have a firearm past the security checkpoint of an airport..." but we GA folk, do we go through Security Checkpoints? And the language in some States is more convoluted than that...

Divert into a state that doesn't honor your permit and land at a big airport... ruh-roh... Of course, in some States, you'd fall under the "travel through" rules, as long as you had a lockbox to stuff the thing in. Then there's places like Denver City and County who'd say the lockbox can't be "in the passenger compartment" of the vehicle... hmm... no trunk in a Cessna...

Flying GA with a firearm, probably deserves a whole thread of its own, really. That'd be entertaining. Probably wouldn't get many takers who'd say stuff like, "I always fly with a gun and I've landed at all these places listed..." The law is hairy enough, perfectly normal law-abiding folks can trip over technicalities and minor differences between States, so if folks are doing it, they're not exactly going to advertise it.

If there's one set of broken laws that I'd be happy to see change to something sane nationally, it's concealed carry law... similar sentiments to the gun-grabbers, who want national controls, I say it's one Country, and if you're issued a permit, your permit is good everywhere...

But... that ain't how it actually shakes out. That whole "State's rights" thing gets in the way, and probably rightly so.

Anywhoo... just looking up info for fun...

Wisconsin Honors Permits from these States:
Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virgin Islands, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming

Wisconsin Does Not Honor Permits from these States:
Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Guam, Maine, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York City, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, American Samoa, Illinois, N. Mariana Islands

(From http://www.usacarry.com/concealed_carry_permit_reciprocity_maps.html )

With some odd-ball exceptions, like they'll honor Alaska permits after early 2013, since Alaska changed how they issue permits to Wisconsin's liking...

And, of course, you still have to know Wisconsin-specific laws about where...

So... LOL... so all you folks that live in States on that second list, you're all second-class Citizens in the eyes of Wisconsin! Also note the distinct absence of Illinois on both lists... probably a good thing, those nutbags there can't get control of the worst murder rate in the U.S. :)

Here's Wisconsin's Concealed Carry FAQ for your reading enjoyment. Count up all the weird little loopholes that they created with bad wording... if you dare. (No worries, every State does it...)

http://www.doj.state.wi.us/sites/default/files/dles/ccw/ccw-faq.pdf

:stirpot: :lol: :rofl:
 
Last edited:
steingar said:
I am perhaps not the best one to ask. I don't feel the need for a firearm in any of those venues. The only time I've ever felt even a twinge of a need for a firearm I was in very dangerous situations of my own making.

Oshkosh is a wonderful family oriented gathering of some of the best people on Earth. I go every year and sleep on the ground. I genuinely cannot fathom why anyone would feel the need for a firearm.
Click to expand...

Perhaps some folks feel the need for a firearm during the trip to and return from AirVenture.
 
fnpdoc said:
So would you want one if you happened to be at the places like those where they had shootings or knife attacks?
Click to expand...

I've been in places with shootings and knife attacks, and been in danger of them being directed at me. But a quick wit and glib tongue have served me well. So have my two feet. I can run quite quickly when motivated.
 
steingar said:
I've been in places with shootings and knife attacks, and been in danger of them being directed at me. But a quick wit and glib tongue have served me well. So have my two feet. I can run quite quickly when motivated.
Click to expand...

Probably not faster than a bullet though.
 
roncachamp said:
Probably not faster than a bullet though.
Click to expand...

No, just faster than the fellow wielding it. I've always nursed the suspicion that armed neer-do-wells have little in the way of firearms training and are probably poor shots.

I said I was probably not the right person to talk about this. I'm not afraid of the world and don't feel nor have I ever felt the need for a firearm.

As far as the EAA, I have every right to deny entry to my home of anyone carrying a firearm, and will exercise it. I don't want those things in the Steinholme. The EAA has every right to keep them out of their buildings and away from their events.
 
steingar said:
No, just faster than the fellow wielding it. I've always nursed the suspicion that armed neer-do-wells have little in the way of firearms training and are probably poor shots.

I said I was probably not the right person to talk about this. I'm not afraid of the world and don't feel nor have I ever felt the need for a firearm.

As far as the EAA, I have every right to deny entry to my home of anyone carrying a firearm, and will exercise it. I don't want those things in the Steinholme. The EAA has every right to keep them out of their buildings and away from their events.
Click to expand...

That depends. If examples of people with misconceptions about firearms are desired you might be the perfect person.
 
<<Thinking like someone wanting to do ill to many rich, exclusive, genuine 'merikuns>>:

Let me see, where can I find a lot of people, all grouped close together, clueless about security, and now - completely disarmed? I would prefer to target the cons or neocons that support all that military stuff, and not some liberal place like CA or NY, cause that's been done. Maybe the south like Texas? Nope, too many people with weapons there, I wouldn't be very successful. How about the upper west like MT? No one congregates in MT for anything, so that's out. The midwest is full of conservatives outside of MN and IL. Maybe WI, like the Dells. Oops, guns not restricted in the Dells. It has to be a big gathering with a lot of cameras, and press. What's this then? Oshkosh... Hmm, never heard of it. Wow, aviation, military, lots of neocons, and vets, expensive planes, even some celebs! Now it's gun-free too! Perfect, we have our location.
 
I own guns but I never got around to getting a carry permit. Mainly because the only places I go where I really want one for self defense are places like Chicago where it's still illegal anyway. I generally try not to be somewhere if I really think Ill need to protect myself with lethal force.

That said, these little signs are annoying because they're really not trying to solve a problem, someone just wanted to make a political statement.
 
Jay Honeck said:
I agree with you. OSH is probably statistically the safest place on the planet, if you can avoid the whirling ginsu knives.
Click to expand...

Or doing low, slow, base-to-final turns for rwy 18 in a swept-wing Beach jet. Then you'll get bloody.
 
nddons said:
Or doing low, slow, base-to-final turns for rwy 18 in a swept-wing Beach jet. Then you'll get bloody.
Click to expand...

Well, there is that. But only if you're not paying attention to your airspeed.

Back on topic, I've carried in my plane. I've even carried in my plane at OSH. I've never felt unsafe in OSH, but we've flown into some fairly sketchy places to/from, so better safe than sorry.

It's like carrying hull insurance. You hope you never need it, but you're glad to have it if you do.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Well, there is that. But only if you're not paying attention to your airspeed.

Back on topic, I've carried in my plane. I've even carried in my plane at OSH. I've never felt unsafe in OSH, but we've flown into some fairly sketchy places to/from, so better safe than sorry.

It's like carrying hull insurance. You hope you never need it, but you're glad to have it if you do.
Click to expand...

As an otherwise law-abiding friend of mine once said, in response to my question about how he deals with various firearms laws and ordinances, if I don't need to use it, nobody needs to know that I have it. If I ever need to use it, I won't be especially concerned about someone telling me that I shouldn't have it.

If we're going to agree to prohibit firearms, we better also prohibit large knives, hatchets, axes, chainsaws, pressure cookers, and anything else which could conceivably be used as a weapon.

I will of course point out that "other" weapons (including airplanes, trucks, buses, and cars) seem to be the favorite choice of terrorists around the world, as we've all recently witnessed in the news. And in every one of those cases, terrorists have been successful because of the failure of law enforcement to effectively act on intelligence information which would have prevented the attack. For those who think that the "experts" in law enforcement should be the only ones responsible for keeping us safe, no thank you, most gun owners have a far better track record of their own.


JKG
 
JGoodish said:
If we're going to agree to prohibit firearms, we better also prohibit large knives, hatchets, axes, chainsaws, pressure cookers, and anything else which could conceivably be used as a weapon.
Click to expand...

Some of the idiots taxiing at OSH present a far greater danger to others than anyone with a firearm.

Heh. Heh.
 
Can I still bring my pressure cooker to OSH?

Too soon?
 
JGoodish said:
If we're going to agree to prohibit firearms, we better also prohibit large knives, hatchets, axes, chainsaws, pressure cookers, and anything else which could conceivably be used as a weapon.
Click to expand...
Weak argument, I'm afraid...all those other objects have uses that do not involve violence. The only rational reason to carry a firearm is to have it available to use against a hostile creature. Unless you belong to a gun club that gets REALLY creative with their pop-up targets.... :)

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
Weak argument, I'm afraid...all those other objects have uses that do not involve violence. The only rational reason to carry a firearm is to have it available to use against a hostile creature. Unless you belong to a gun club that gets REALLY creative with their pop-up targets.... :)

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...

Who get's to dictate what a rational reason is?

I took a .45 hand gun to high school for show and tell, was an original run 1911. No hostile creatures harmed. Perfectly legitimate reason. No school administrator had a heart attack.

An even better legitimate reason is that I want to.
 
wanttaja said:
Weak argument, I'm afraid...all those other objects have uses that do not involve violence. The only rational reason to carry a firearm is to have it available to use against a hostile creature. Unless you belong to a gun club that gets REALLY creative with their pop-up targets.... :)
Click to expand...

FYI, I've used guns for years and never for violence. Hunting is a very legitimate use of a gun. Dove, pheasant, and quail are tasty animals and most definitely not hostile creatures.

Maybe you have no rational basis for your claims?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top