1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

In re: "Army vet disarmed of his AR and 1911 by cop"

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by CoyoteSix, Apr 22, 2013.

  1. CoyoteSix

    CoyoteSix Well-Known Member

    While reading the thread in the title (all eight pages) I found a huge divide between forum betters. It pretty much pertained to:

    A: Open Carry should not be practiced, it is dangerous to the carrier (No proper weapon retention, gun being taken and carrier being shot) and will attract too much negative attention in even mildly Anti-Gun areas. (Temple TX apparently).


    B: Open Carry should be practiced as much as possible, it will desensitize the local Anti-Gun population if we do it enough, it also deters crime. (Ex: Where a gun is openly visible a criminal will choose a different area to operate.)

    This brings the question to mind: Should we conceal carry so we don't scare the nanny antis? Or should we OC as much as possible, displaying our rights excellently during this Anti-Gun crisis, but also receive alot of negative attention ( MWAG calls, some gun owners acting like Jerks to LEO's who are also acting like jerks, with the best part being that it's all on YouTube where a generally liberal internet community can use it to say "What an <removed> gun owner that guy is being to the poor cop!")

    So what do you think THR? Do we conceal mostly and appease the antis? Or do we OC and provoke anti-gun legislation while displaying 2A?
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 23, 2013
  2. 76shuvlinoff

    76shuvlinoff Well-Known Member

    I have not read that whole thread, I'll need to go back to it now.

    Although OC is our right I personally feel it pulls unnecessary attention to me and in some cases could make me a target, I much prefer concealed.
  3. M-Cameron

    M-Cameron member

    my opinion: do whatever you are comfortable with.

    there are pros and cons to each.....which ever you choose will depend on your particular situation.

    i have no particular problem with OC in general......i just dont agree with the people who do it solely for a reaction( Ex. the guys who record themselves OC-ing a rifle through the mall dressed in fatigues and tac-gear and getting upset when police show up to talk to him)...
  4. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Well-Known Member

  5. tomrkba

    tomrkba Well-Known Member

    Most gun owners do not support the right to keep and bear arms; they support limited "keeping" of arms. Notice how few concealed carry permits are issued in the states. OC may or may not change that attitude. I hope it does.

    The real reason to OC is to send a message to those in power. The message that you are sending is that the citizen has the power to say "NO!" to their petty schemes. Politicians and their supporters do not like this message. OC reminds them that they cannot do anything they want. Cops harass people OCing because a politician in their chain of command told them explicitly or implicitly to do so. The law is clear in OC states, yet cops continue to mess with people exercising their right. This is why we see so much contention in OC threads.
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2013
  6. So you view OC as a means to threaten others and impose your will on them. And you wonder why people don't like people owning guns? You take us from a viable self defense argument to a losing " see me I got a gun so don't mess with me stance". Thats a bigger threat to us then Bloomberg and the anti's could ever be.
  7. 316SS

    316SS Well-Known Member

    I don't think that is fair. If I draw my weapon to protect myself from a violent attacker, am I "threatening others and imposing my will on them?" In a sense, yes, but it misses the point.

    I don't want to speak for tomrkba, but I read his post to mean that he feels OC acts as a deterrent to politicians running roughshod over our rights, and I agree with him.

    BADUNAME30 Well-Known Member

    Out of respect for law enforcement. I carry concealed.
    They have enough to do.
  9. oneounceload

    oneounceload member

    If you TRULY want to change society's attitude, then become a teacher. Where do you think all the anti-gun hatred gets its start? In elementary school - remember, "The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world" and those teachers have been at it since LBJ's Great Society - almost 50 years. We went from guns everywhere, gun shops, high-end stores like Ambercrombie and Fitch carrying guns to no guns, especially at A&F. We went from mail order delivered to your house to FFL and now background checks. Even when I had my FFL, there was no phone call, the form was filled and filed.

    You really think you will gain a lot by having an "in your face attitude" against 5 decades of brainwashing? Maybe, but it might take 5 decades to change it and you'll need to start when they are young
  10. tomrkba

    tomrkba Well-Known Member

    316SS summed it up nicely. Notice how Queen of Thunder immediately went to the 100% negative case?

    Politicians are running over us from every direction. This country started a revolt over a tax that was less than 1%. I paid around 55% of my income to state, Federal, and local governments (including sales tax). This last round of ZeroCare taxes diverts retirement savings to taxes. The President thinks he can have Eric Holder declare me a terrorist and deny me my freedom indefinitely. He thinks he can order me assassinated. The point of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments are to prevent that behavior and people like QoT want to complain about OC.
  11. zxcvbob

    zxcvbob Well-Known Member

    It's not a threat, but it is a symbol to remind them that they serve "at the consent of the governed" and that consent can be withdrawn. Obviously those in power don't like that message (and generally, neither do the courts.)
    “Government control cannot go on as long as people have some sort of ability to say ‘Hey wait just a doggone minute.’ That’s what the government fears, they don’t really fear the criminals, they support the criminals. What they fear is a law abiding person.” --Sheriff David Clarke, Milwaukee
  12. M-Cameron

    M-Cameron member

    Dude, you need to chill out or youre going to burst a blood vessel.

    No one is talking about having you assassinated or labeled a terrorist. It's behavior like this that cast gun owners as abunch or radical anti-govt yahoos.
  13. Skylerbone

    Skylerbone Well-Known Member

    If you carry for protection and are situationally aware (as you should be at all times) then you will be continuously evaluating people you come into contact with. Your own prejudices will dictate who may or may not be safe or sketchy whether by clothing or environment and I should think non-firearm owners will be no different. IMO, their reaction to someone openly carrying, however misguided, is no different than yours might be to a nervous guy in an overcoat mid-summer at a daycare: out of place. If you're Jessie Duff, they may not feel more than heightened curiosity but I suspect most grown men will be met with fear. Most people want to believe security is a given and firearms remind them of a harsh reality they simply aren't accustomed to.
  14. Godsgunman

    Godsgunman Well-Known Member

    The way I see it, if your state law allows both then do whichever you feel comfortable doing. I prefer concealed but I can OC if I choose. The problem with these posts on the OC vs CC debate is they are filled with personal prejudice and emotion and very little fact. Take for instance the OP saying "should we only carry concealed so we don't scare the nanny antis". This statement holds very little to no weight because its just filled with bias and name calling and no fact. I don't conceal because I dont want to scare people I conceal because I prefer it and I feel I have an advantage being concealed. Antis are against both OC and CC last time I checked. You may prefer OC and thats great I just dont see any purpose for there to be a rift between Carriers (OC or CC), we're all on the same team.
  15. sfed

    sfed Well-Known Member

    I watched that video of the arrest and disarming of the military veteran, in my opinion, if the veteran had been a bit more courteous to the officer and had left some of his attitude at home he might have avoided being arrested. I realize he had served our country, which I am proud of him for that, but police officers have a hard enough job without any individual being obnoxious as he was to the police officer. I feel if he had handled the situation differently ( especially in front of his 10 YO son) he might have been allowed to continue on his 10 mile hike.
  16. Superlite27

    Superlite27 Well-Known Member

    As a long time open carrier and open carry advocate, I'll toss in my two cents.

    Everyone has their own specific method of carry that they prefer. Just as we each express ourselves through our hairstyles, clothing, cars, tattoos/lack thereof, and other means of "style", some of us also choose to express ourselves by our actions.

    There isn't only one reason for open carry, just as there isn't only one reason to own a gun in the first place. I choose to do so for numerous reasons. Some of them being:

    I am not "ashamed" to be a law abiding gun owner. I do not feel the need to "hide" my firearm. It is a tool just as my belt is used to hold up my pants, my shoes are used to protect my feet, my gun is used to protect my life. Why should I hide it? I am not ashamed to posess it.

    It is perfectly legal in my area. Maybe someone could name another perfectly legal activity I "just shouldn't do".

    How many people walk up to concealed carriers and begin a discussion about becoming a firearm owner, or gun rights, or any other gun related topic? It happens to me all the time. Running a close second to "Are you a police officer?", I often get asked, "Is that legal?"......What an EXCELLENT OPPORTUNITY TO PROMOTE FIREARMS FREEDOM. When is the last time a concealed carrier got approached and ended a pleasant discussion with a fellow citizen that remarked, "I might buy myself a gun, and learn to shoot."? I have on a couple of occasions. "Out of sight, out of mind." means that when you keep your rights out of sight, they remain out of the majority of people's minds.

    I participate quite frequently in defensive pistol competitions. IDPA, but also less formal range sponsored "compettitive events" that aren't as strict on the rules. I have yet to see anyone compete at these less formal events while concealed. Why is this? Maybe because there's a HUGE tactical advantage in open carry? (If there wasn't much of an advantage, why does EVERYONE...ALWAYS shoot without a concealment garment?) Spare me that "tactical advantage of surprise" garbage. Surprise is an OFFENSIVE tactic. You can parrot that "the best defense is a good offense" crap all you want, but the fact is if you are in the process of "surprising" a criminal with your concealed firearm, YOU ARE ALREADY IN A FIGHT TO THE DEATH. I commonly hear the 'ol "You'll be the first one to be shot!" line. Yes, there are a few instances of OC'ers being purposefully targeted. However, this is actually pretty rare. The MAJORITY of crooks are looking for easy prey, and have no wish to DIE. Which appears less likely to be problematic: The apparent defenseless CC'er, or the guy with a pistol? If you like your "surprise" tactic so much, I wish you well with the guy who just decided not to mess with me because of the obvious problem strapped to my hip. Maybe your "surprise" is much more effective at killing him, but hey.....which one of us is in a gunfight? How is the fight to the death you are now in (not me) tactically superior?

    I also hear the "Your scaring people!" claptrap pretty frequently. As a matter of fact, I've often had folks walk right up to me and tell me how frightening I am. I am soooooooo scary, they walk right up to me and start lecturing. A complete stranger. With a scary gun. So scary, that folks feel like approaching just to start a negative encounter with a complete stranger. That's pretty scary. They must be so frightened, they forgot to run away in terror. I once had a lady stand up and YELL at a manager in Denny's restaurant that I was causing a scene by carrying that gun! He asked her to please sit down and stop frightening people, so she yelled, "I'm not going to stay here while he's in here!" and left. The entire restaurant applauded as soon as she went out the door and then peacefully went back to enjoying their breakfasts. A couple with a few kids came in and sat next to me. Yup. I'm real scary.

    As an open carrier, it is very easy to "take the low road". An open carrier will inevitably get questions from the general public, and after hearing the same, often obviously stupid questions ("Is that a real gun?) it is extremely easy to get annoyed and "react" with a funny retort, or smart-aleck reply. Never EVER "react". Unlike concealed carriers, open carriers are a VISIBLE representative of the ENTIRE FIREARMS COMMUNITY. One snide quip, and the person who was simply uninformed, curious, or ambivolent now has the potential to lump all gun owners in the same pot. "I just asked a question, and he smarted off! Those gun owners are jerks!". So as a visible representative, it is also an OC'ers responsibility to the firearms community to always be polite, and use interactions with the public as an opportunity to portray all gun owners as what we generally are: Law abiding people who are some of the most polite folks in the world.

    Interactions with police are also fairly frequent. Unlike the vet, I have never been disarmed. I also am very polite, and refuse to voluntarily interact with the police. When approached, I inform the officers that I am doing nothing illegal, carrying a lawfully owned firearm is not probable cause for detention, I do not require any assistance, and politely state my desire to end any voluntary interaction. I then politely ask if I am free to go. The answer has always been "yes". I have often been approached by police and have had inquiries made. I have never been detained.

    Bottom line: When OC'ing, the OC'er represents the entire firearm community. Everything from people's perception, to your own hassle free expression of your freedom can easily be all to the good by simply remaining a good steward of firearm ownership and being polite to all you encounter.
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2013
  17. Arizona_Mike

    Arizona_Mike Well-Known Member

    My observations:

    1. How do you concealed carry an M4
    2. "We don't care what the law says" and "In this day and age" are much much worse than Grisham getting loud in tone (put still cooperative and even helpful in actuality).

  18. Trung Si

    Trung Si Well-Known Member

    I agree 100%!;)
  19. Swichblade

    Swichblade Well-Known Member

    I would prefer concealed carry so I don't attract attention, but unfortunately, state law doesn't grant me that privilege until I am 21 years old, so its OC for me until then.
  20. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator

    On the other hand there is far too little evidence that wide spread openly carrying guns would necessarily have a positive effect for the RKBA.

    Certainly in the late 1960s in California, the Black Panthers openly carrying guns resulted in the open carry of loaded guns being made illegal. And a few years ago, demonstrations involving the open carrying or unloaded guns resulted in that being made illegal.

    If enough people do something that's legal but they do it in a way that enough other people find obnoxious, the activity might not stay legal for long.

    • See this post 6 regarding the history of the loss in Florida of the right to openly carry in this thread on another forum.

    • There are plenty of examples of rights being lost because enough folks didn't like the ways in which they were being exercised. Over the years, in many communities, we have seen many zoning and other laws adopted restricting how you can use your own property. In some places you may not work on your car in your own driveway in view of the public street. In some places you must get design approval of remodeling or landscaping visible to the public. In some communities, you may not park or store large vehicles like boats on trailers or RVs on your property so as to be visible to the public. These sorts of restrictions have in large part been the result of strong enough public sentiment that some things previously lawfully done by private parties on their own land were unseemly or unattractive.

    If a lot of people start legally open carrying their guns hoping to achieve a particular political result, we can reasonably expect a range of responses from, "Cool" to "Yawn" to "A nut with a gun; there ought to be a law." What the distribution is will decide whether openly carrying is politically helpful or politically harmful. But we can't know whether open carrying is doing any political good without having a better idea of that distribution. And the distribution will probably be different in different places at different times.

    Some tools like properly conducted surveys or focus groups can be useful in measuring public opinion and predicting likely effect. But the flip side is that without that sort of evidence, we really can't know whether open carry, from a political perspective, is good or bad.

    And what evidence do you have that open carry has anything like that effect?

    I continue to be dismayed by the failure of so many in the RKBA community to recognize the importance of positively influencing public opinion or to have any real clue about how to determine how to go about doing that.

    During the course of my career I've had a pretty fair amount of experience working with business clients who needed to be able to influence public perception, understand how to make advertising effective and find the best ways to effectively communicate their messages. When a lot was at stake, they didn't just guess.

    When they sat around their conference tables (I was there), they didn't assume that their audiences would think the ways they did or have the same values and perceptions. They consulted with psychologists and others who have studied human motivation and perception and beliefs. They thoroughly analyzed the demographics of the audiences and tried to understand what they cared about, what they were scared of, what made them happy or feel secure, what they believed and didn't believe.

    They also tested their conclusions with surveys and focus groups. They paid attention to what was happening and made adjustments in their messages and techniques if things weren't working the way they wanted them to.

    And I strongly suspect that our opposition is doing at least some of those things.
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2013

Share This Page