I'm not going to argue whether or not the chamber was empty because no-one knows the answer to that question except the individual who was racking the slide. People don't typically rack the firearm many times over to load it. I'd have only assumed the guy was inspecting the firearm and maybe looking into the chamber could have been construed as aiming the firearm. I especially wouldn't have done anything after he went inside and nothing more happened with exception of 3 police cars pulling up in front of the guys place several minutes later.

Bottom line, this fear of firearms has been a growing issue and a giant step in the propaganda war began with DB Coopers High jacking back in 1971 where thereafter carryon firearms were banned on commercial airliners yet previous to that time they could be carried aboard with you. Many of us here were around when firearms could be carried aboard airliners. Who here remembers those days? Anyone? I would also assume most here would think such an act to be stupid and that's because you've been conditioned to think that way. Assume the worst and call the police is the new mantra.

It's a different world (therefore the second amendment has become archaic). Yes, I understand that conditioned perception. That said, I don't agree with it. It's only a matter of time and the second amendment will be repealed because of the current conditioning through intolerance.

" I hear what sounds like a gun being racked back repeatedly."
And this indicates that the firearm is being (A) Loaded (B)Cleared

"I go into another room to look and sure enough a man holding what appears to be a pistol, aimed toward our road, pulling the slide back repeatedly."
And this means (A) Someone's checking the action of the slide (B) Preparing to kill someone (C) Someone is pissed at the road and cant get themselves to shoot it.

" I am like "what the Fuçk?!?,"
Is that because you're not sure what it means when a firearm is racked repeatedly? Did the man make bang bang noises with his mouth too? Was he yelling obscenities and waving the gun around randomly and pointlessly?

" it looked as if it was a pistol, it could have been a BB gun but it definitely, I believed it was a firearm. The man then went inside his home."
Wow... it could have been a spring loaded plastic BB gun that one needs to rack in order to compress the spring and load the plastic bb to shoot out the plastic bb? Maybe it wasn't working correctly?

This is why very little exposure to public firearms handling promotes instant fear of the possible worst case scenario in peoples minds when a firearm is brandished in what is NOW considered abnormal situations.

If you've never watched the film "The High and Mighty" 1954 staring John Wayne, you should see it. In one scene a passenger on the plane pulls a gun on a fellow passenger and later the gun is returned to the passenger who pulled the gun and nothing happens from the incident. In 1954 having a gun on a plane wasn't an issue nor was brandishing it. The point is this, the presence of guns in todays society is met with great fear and that fear has been perpetuated by the removal of guns from public view.  The fact you don't see guns on anyone but police officers or armored car personnel is the perfect way to condition people to be fearful of guns when in the hands of anyone but those of proper authority. This has been one of the gun grabbers biggest strategies, to remove guns from public familiarity and therefore it paves the way for the average public to become less aware of the realities of guns and more malleable and accepting of anti gun propaganda. Simply seeing a gun promotes fear in the average person. This was not the case in 1954. Today a guy racking his firearm and aiming at an empty street and then going back in his house gets a neighbor to call the police on him. No anger expressed or yelling or anything really crazy, just an act that wasn't in agreement with the callers opinion on how firearms should be handled is all it took.

 

Racked, racked, racked = clearing a chamber.

I see the NRA isn't providing appropriate training with regard to the handling of ammunition, too much emphasis on the hardware and not enough on the most dangerous element involved, the ammunition itself.
 
In one breath, ejecting live rounds isn't dangerous unless you've a box of firing pins laying around and in the next breath an empty firearm is dangerous when aimed at an empty roadway. That's a special sort of double standard nonsense, one for the books and I'll be sure to get some elements of that into the test questions ammunition handling section.

36. When in your living room, when is it safe to eject live rounds from your firearm?
     A) When no-one else is watching.
     B) When my box of firing pins is closed and more than 15' away around the corner in the hallway.
     C) When the chamber ejection path is ...

Would anyone here care to guess what happens when live ammunition is incidentally discharged outside the chamber of a firearm?

This is precisely why I posted about the necessity of open carry to preserve the right to keep and bear arms. Just as talents are lost when not exercised the same applies to a people rights when not exercised.
When the right to bear arms is not exercised in an open capacity, we inadvertently create alarm when such open exposure occurs as others become alarmed when it happens in front of them. This exactly why open carry is the responsibility of all people who expect to retain their right to keep and bear arms for themselves and their children.

A man racking his hand gun in the front yard might be making sure his firearm is clear and no round is chambered or trying to clear a jammed round. Rather than having a bullet eject in a house from a chamber which could strike an object in the house and fire openly, it is safer to eject a possible round outdoors on a lawn or some other safe ejection area. Live rounds can be detonated when thrown through the air if they strike a hard object in the correct orientation (rare but not unheard of). Also, aiming it at the street may have been nothing more than citing down the chamber to see if it was clear. I wouldn't have been alarmed nor would I consider the person an idiot and weather or not they were a relative of the home occupants or friend would not have been my business, not unless there was a firearm discharge.

I would consider the phone call to police to be a direct product of inadequate exposure to firearms and further proof as to how the right to keep and bear arms has become an intolerant act even by those who claim to back the second amendment. You're giving the gun grabbers all the ammo they need by not openly practicing the right to keep and bear arms, it's just a matter of a generation or two more and the right will be repealed by a new constitutional amendment.

     

I was away but read through the comments on the libertarian party.

What I've found along the way during conversation of the libertarian party is this.
Democrats tend to view the libertarians as out of touch with reality because they seek to destroy the socialized support systems and therefore see them as anarchists in general. When calming discussing that these agendas by the libertarians are not considered tenable goals in the here and now but rather reflect a direction in establishing a people that no longer have a need of these things, they begin to open up and understand the libertarian goals and appreciate them and want to know more.

On the other hand when speaking to Republicans, they are typically open to and appreciate the libertarian position but as with most conservatives they point out  that there's no chance for the libertarians to win and therefore such a vote would only help out the Democrats.

Both democrats and republicans appreciate the libertarian goals but each from differing perspectives.

This is the key to unifying us as a people with a purpose again. This is our lost middle ground.

If you as a republican or democrat can appreciate the libertarian goals then you can turn to the opposite party and share those thoughts and vice versa. We can only  control our nation and redirect its direction if we as people can come together and re-establish our common ground. We cannot allow the corruption to divide us any longer. So, if you refuse to vote libertarian just because the numbers don't seem to be there, at the very least begin using the party to establish a common ground communication channel with those of the opposing party. Friends, family, coworkers etc. It can only be fixed if we fix it amongst one another first. Don't allow your political conversation to dwell on the r or d party.

Back in the old days, I'm sure some here remember neighborhood meetings that discussed these sorts of issues. Maybe you recall your parents or grandparents hosting or involved in these neighborhood meetings. Maybe not for some people. The point is, we need to rediscover our shared ground again and fight fiercely with one another to regain it's major majority again while setting aside the extremist where they belong in the shadows of obscurity.

Please forgive the typos etc. I'm still getting used to this simulated touch keyboard.

From my observations both the Republican and Democratic parties have verged away from their roots and each has adopted a globalist side that they label with what ever subset group that fits into that regime. So we have a globalist center now which is in direct conflict with the US Constitution and the Republic which it formed. Thus far no party has been formed to represent this global interest so they have usurped both the Democrat and Republican parties. Their agents are self evident in both parties.

There is another center found at the origin core of each party and it's represented by the Libertarian party. This party exists forthright because it need not hide in the shadows of the major parties skirts. IMO it's time for true Americans to abandon the infiltrated parties and readopt their roots.

My apologies.  I don't argue with anti gun people, I simply educate them by asking them questions such as "what is an assault weapon?", "What sort of people kill other people?",  "Why don't we have any legislation to keep guns out of "those" peoples hands?" Etc. I play ignorant on the topic and guide them through the educational process with questions. When I ran across the statement here, it pissed me off. Seriously? Lol.

Tomg,

         The features you are referencing in the semi-auto version of the automatic version rifle are additions that are largely effective and designed exclusively for automatic weapon efficiency but when utilized in a semiautomatic provide little to no additional effectiveness in operational function relative to that of any modern day semi automatic rifle. Each of the additions on automatic rifles are there for automatic select and each has a purpose and extremely beneficial when used in automatic mode but they lend very little additional support or effectiveness when in semi auto mode.
You may as well be buying a formula 1 race car with a stock 4 cylinder yugo engine.

I was hoping the addresses followed some standardized pattern.

Thank you very much. I want to make sure every part of conversation is logged and time stamped. Email is perfect for that.

No problem - I just removed a bunch of info above - people need to be more careful who they share their personal info with - I found his home phone and cell phone number too, not cool.

Still trying to find an electronic method of contacting Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri?
You can contact him on his Linked In account. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/harry-kubojiri/40/6b7/99 and that will pop up in his e-mail.