Playboy talks protection and ‘baring’ arms


PDA






JohnPierce
May 22, 2012, 09:26 PM
Playboy talks protection and ‘baring’ arms
---
The June 2012 edition of Playboy, which hit the newsstands last Friday, features an article by Pat Jordan entitled “Armed & Dangerous: Has Gun Culture Gone Too Far?” In the article, in which I am quoted, Pat discusses the open carry movement and the concerns that some have expressed about gun owners “baring it all.”

Jordan, an admitted concealed carrier and believer in self-defense rights, clearly has a problem with open carry. He stereotypes, generalizes, and often just plain gets it wrong. Despite the fact that I am inordinately proud to have been quoted in Playboy, I feel duty bound to offer a point by point rebuttal to his article.

Excerpt ... Read More (http://monachuslex.com/?p=899)

If you enjoyed reading about "Playboy talks protection and ‘baring’ arms" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Hypnogator
May 22, 2012, 10:41 PM
John makes another very valid point, and one I don't think he'd mind if I highlight here:

And think about it from another perspective. We have Playboy running an article in which open carry is presented as the extreme alternative to the “righteous” activity of carrying concealed.

Think about that … We may not have finished out mission of normalizing open carry in every state, but we sure seem to have moved the bar a long way toward making concealed carry the new normal. And that’s not a bad place to start … when you’re winning the culture war.

We live in interesting times, indeed. :cool:

ApacheCoTodd
May 22, 2012, 10:43 PM
I figure there's gonna be a lot more of this "divide and conquer" anti OC nonsense in the future. On the anti gun side the issue is obvious - get some of "us" to fight for them.

On the pro-gun side I think it's like the old hunters against "assault weapon" stance. "I don't see a use/need/justification for it so you don't have one either." That and the "your motives are suspect" crowd.

This whole "just OCing to make a statement" argument plays well into the antis hands. Who cares why if it's legally, responsibly and safely done.

JohnPierce
May 23, 2012, 09:30 AM
John makes another very valid point, and one I don't think he'd mind if I highlight here:



We live in interesting times, indeed. :cool:
Hypnogator,

Of course I don't mind. Thanks for taking the time to read the article. The passage you quoted really says it all. :)


John

JustinJ
May 23, 2012, 09:35 AM
I figure there's gonna be a lot more of this "divide and conquer" anti OC nonsense in the future. On the anti gun side the issue is obvious - get some of "us" to fight for them.

Just because we all like guns and believe in a right to own and carry them one way or another doesn't me we must all agree on every single issue. There is no "anti" on the grassy knoll here. You may not agree with those who disagree with open carry but implying they have been controlled by "antis" is silly.

X-Rap
May 23, 2012, 10:08 AM
I have to go along with the 44 states that allow either way to carry and hope that we as gun carriers can stay humble and be ever vigilant while we promote and recover this God given right all across this great country.

MachIVshooter
May 23, 2012, 11:49 AM
The open carry movement is an interesting and multi-faceted one.

IMO, before one decides to OC, they should first consider their own stance on other legal things people do publicly that might offend them. Are you bothered by openly gay homosexuals, lots of tatoos & piercings or anything else "less normal"? If so, remember that others will probably feel that way about your openly carrying a firearm. Whether you intend to make a statement or not, you do make one.

Personally, I do not OC. There have been a few times I have not bothered to take it off or cover it up after a day at the range or when I go into town during a hunting trip, but generally I only OC when on the range, or hunting/hiking/camping. Why not? I don't care for the public attention it draws, and I do not wish to appear fearful. Kind of a discreet airbags on the inside of your car rather than bubble wrapping the outside thing.

I don't judge those who want to OC, but it's not for me. And I don't believe we have any more right to shove our agenda down others throats than they do to force their persepective on us, so we should understand that some people may not be very accepting of it, just as we can each be intolerant of other perfectly legal public behaviors.

Sam1911
May 23, 2012, 11:56 AM
so we should understand that some people may not be very accepting of it, just as we can each be intolerant of other perfectly legal public behaviors.

Er...maybe better said, "We should understand that as we ask others to be tolerant of our expressions of freedom, we must be tolerant of theirs?"

I'd rather not excuse someone else's prejudices just so I can remain a bigot myself! ;)

(I know, that's not what you meant.)

Owen Sparks
May 23, 2012, 12:36 PM
I live in a Southern town that has an ‘open carry’ ordinance against beer! Seriously, it is illegal to walk out of a store with a six pack that is not properly concealed by a bag. It is even illegal to drink outdoors on your own property unless it is in a cup! If the police see you with a beer can or bottle they can cite you for an open container violation, even if you are sitting on your front porch. The law is a direct influence of the Southern Baptists who do not want their children exposed to alcohol. If you suggest that "If these people do not approve of alcohol, then they should not drink, but leave everyone else alone." They will get all indignant and bring up ‘the children’ just like liberals do when they argue for more gun laws.

Why do I bring this up? Because a lot of Northern liberals feel the same way about guns that the religious right feels about drinking. In both cases you have a bunch of busy bodies who want to use the power of the state to control private behavior that they find offensive. That is really what this is about. An openly carried pistol is no more dangerous than a concealed one but the idea of you running around loose with a weapon, or alcohol offends some people.

You have no right NOT to be offended. You have a right not to be harmed and as long as that pistol stays in the holster it is of no danger to anyone.

We can argue the pros and cons of open carry all day long but in the end it should be the individuals choice, not the choice of the majority.

HGUNHNTR
May 23, 2012, 10:55 PM
^ I'm a northern Liberal living in the south and I love beer and guns. Lets let the stereotypes die and focus on affecting the laws that we can instead of complaining. The most effective proponents of gun rights in my community are all liberals, and because of that have been able to reach a lot of folks that a conservative would REALLY turn off.

mljdeckard
May 23, 2012, 11:22 PM
I don't know. I think I need to get a hard copy of the story to be able to objectively evaluate the content and make observations about its assertions. (:D)

Pfletch83
May 23, 2012, 11:30 PM
I Open carry because it isn't as costly money wise as C.C. (I have nothing against C.C.W. mind you I understand the reasons behind C.C.W. and support it very much)

But Open Carry has it's place as well,and serves as a way to educate others in their rights,it reminds them that they need not ask permission to carry,all that needs to be done is to keep the firearm out in the open.

Yes you do get weird looks from some,but most often than not it serves as a way to keep self protection at hand if ever needed,and it also allows those that are fence sitters to ask questions that they might not have asked if the firearm was covered,and out of sight.

mac66
May 25, 2012, 12:56 PM
The thing some of you fail to realize is that carrying/owning a gun is a constitutionally guaranteed civil right. It is no different than in the 60's when blacks were trying to exercise their civil rights. People, both white and black, would say, "don't do that, it will cause trouble. Someone might be offended to have some black woman not want to ride in the back of the bus". "Don't march, it will just make the police mad. It will make it worse on the rest of us."

Once those rights were fought for and recognized by society as a whole most of those things have become a non-issue. It is the same thing with civil gun rights. We have come along way in the last 30 years. We have a long way to go. Open carry will help us get to "constitutional carry," i.e., don't have to ask big brother or the nanny state for permission to own or carry. IMO, we not only have to tolerate OC, but we have to push it. It is one of those things that will condition society into acceptance of Constitutional Carry. Society will eventually figure out that keep and bear arms means own and carry. Carry is carry, there really is no distinction.

When that happens we will look back and shake our heads and wonder what all the hubbub was about. It will happen if we continue to fight and actually understand what we are fighting for.

Owen Sparks
May 25, 2012, 03:27 PM
The best thing you can do to further your right to carry a firearm is to carry a firearm. If it is concealed the general public will never see it and never be influnced. The purpose of open carry by liberty activists is to make seeing armed commonors an every day event and no big deal anymore.

Fishslayer
May 25, 2012, 03:34 PM
The best thing you can do to further your right to carry a firearm is to carry a firearm. If it is concealed the general public will never see it and never be influnced. The purpose of open carry by liberty activists is to make seeing armed commonors an every day event and no big deal anymore.

I lived in north Phoenix for a year going to school & worked graveyards at the local CircleK. It was definitely weird seeing OC for the first time. Got used to it fairly quickly.

Ummm.... some of my "nightcrawlers" made me a bit nervous once in awhile...

Dave Workman
May 26, 2012, 12:08 AM
Finally, a reason to actually READ something in Playboy.
:D

lathedog
May 26, 2012, 12:57 AM
mac66 has it exactly right. Civil liberties must not be held hostage by fear of disapproval.

Skribs
May 26, 2012, 01:10 AM
Wait, when did they start doing articles?

Who's for a rewrite of the 2A?
"The right of the individual to protect oneself and the right of a collective militia to defend the People from tyranny and invasion are paramount. Therefore, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed or restricted by federal, state, or local authorities, and the freedom to carry the weapon in any safe manner shall be upheld." Subtextually: if you have a problem with this, move to Canada or Mexico, whichever is closer. They like gun control.

ErikO
May 26, 2012, 03:50 AM
Just because blacks OCing on the county steps ended up with the California gun laws doesn't make OC wrong. It makes the fearmongers that wrote the laws wrong.

I have no problem with folks OCing. I tend to take it for granted that they are not barred from gun ownership at that point and are probably not someone to fear.

Of course, with my luck I'll meet up with the biggest dummy that wants to loose his/her gun rights and shoots me... lol

Guns do cause a fear response in some folks. Glad I am not one of them, I must be bad at being a Liberal or something.

rfwobbly
May 26, 2012, 07:52 AM
I don't get it. Since the early 1950's, Playboy has fully supported the idea of open carry of 38' and 44's in its photography. What possible difference could a few Glocks and HKs make?

:p

Robert
May 26, 2012, 09:38 AM
Since 5 posts had to be deleted because of silly OT remarks and since it seems to be continuing I am going to call this one done. THR is not a locker room.

If you enjoyed reading about "Playboy talks protection and ‘baring’ arms" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!