Miculek says: stop sending the wrong message with open carry activism

Even though I am an O.C
advocate. I must admit this is a stupid way to do so! It just proves that there are stupid people in every group of people! Guns don't come with brains! People are suppose to have them already!

These people (especially the one with the drug related Facebook posts) are not the type that we want for 2A advocates on any issue. They are doing more to hurt the Open Carry agenda than help it.

Odds on bizzarro- Abbot and Costello there not giving a crap about open carry and just basking in the publicity...

TCB

All that is missing from that photo is for the...robust...fellow to be wearing a black tee shirt with a picture of a wolf and/or eagle on it. Back in the USENET days there used to be a humorous post that made that made the rounds about the types of people one met at gun shows. Those two are nearly perfect examples of the people who inspired that list.

Joe Demko said:

All that is missing from that photo is for the...robust...fellow to be wearing a black tee shirt with a picture of a wolf and/or eagle on it. Back in the USENET days there used to be a humorous post that made that made the rounds about the types of people one met at gun shows. Those two are nearly perfect examples of the people who inspired that list.

Click to expand...

Thanks for engaging but let's keep this positive and respectful so the thread can stay open .

Chipotle Mexican Grill is owned by ... Chipotle Mexican Grill.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=cmg&ql=1

Click to expand...

I'm trying to figure out why none of them are getting shot first and their guns stolen from them....that's what is supposed to happen to people who open carry, right?

CWL said:

It was a direct result of this open carry FB posting, which caused a firestorm of "pro" and "anti" sentiments.



I'm not sure whether this helps or hurts

Click to expand...

While what they did is just plain stupid, the bigger evil is Facebook. Social media will be the end of this country.

These guys probably never carry a gun very often and will mess it up for those who actually carry everyday.

Americans have become very, very tyrannical in their behavior toward people who exercise their rights ("There oughta be a law!"). Many of us seek to criticize anyone who expresses a right in a manner in which they do not approve. Sometimes it is open carry. Do these guys look like great representatives? Of course not. But they are not the problem: WE ARE THE PROBLEM. We have allowed too many anti-gun laws to be created and now we have to dig ourselves out. Open carry is one such method.

We do not demonstrate in large numbers (or with much frequency) for our gun rights. We sit back and let the NRA do the work. We certainly didn't show up in 2012 for Romney (despite being a socialist and signing bad gun laws, he was better than Obama on the right to keep and bear arms). Like it or not, they are normalizing carry. The open carry movement started working against local governments and police who actively suppressed OC. This has also resulted in several states passing premption laws to prevent localities from passing local gun laws. My state, Virginia, now has uniform laws that make carry from county to county a breeze. I do not have to worry about catching a felony because I crossed an invisible line.

You have no ability to stop people from lawfully open carrying. You will be voting against the right to keep and bear arms if you encourage legislatures across the country to ban open carry. This will surely lead to additional bad laws that are tacked on to such bills.

I highly suggest that if you do not like open carry that you should join an open carry group. Rather than criticize, you should encourage them to do so in a respectful and useful way. You are not required to open carry and I attend such gatherings while carrying concealed. Put away the long guns (except in Texas), dress up, hand out cards and pamphlets, wear "Guns save lives!" buttons and so forth. Make sure it looks like a peaceful gathering on First Amendment grounds rather than a motley militia of fools.

NavyLCDR said:

I'm trying to figure out why none of them are getting shot first and their guns stolen from them....that's what is supposed to happen to people who open carry, right?

Click to expand...

This reads like an attempt at misdirection in order divert attention away from the public relations blunder made by the fringe goofballs shown in the pic.

It appears you're more comfortable rehashing older online debates that aren't relevant to this issue than engaging in a discussion where people have a legitimate criticism and, I would argue, a serious basis for concern.

Hopefully no one will take the bait.

I don't want to read too much into your statement though; maybe it was just dry humor .

I would be curious to know your thoughts as to whether this incident, as pertains to PR for gun owners is

-net positive
-net negative
-other (please specify)

If you agree with most of us that it's a net negative, do you think it's appropriate to have a discussion within our community and voice dissent to dissuade this sort of thing from happening (as it's now happened multiple times), or do you feel (as I have gathered from your posts) that to do so is inappropriate?

I have gathered from your posts in the past that maybe you feel anyone expressing such dissent may have a hidden agenda that's incompatible with truly being pro gun. I'm not sure if that's actually the case for you but I strongly disagree with that view.

Lets be real. We have a segment of "Pro 2nd Amendment" that are flat out retarded with there displays. This hurts us. I wouldn,t be surprised if they were anti 2nd A planted to do stupid stuff to make us look bad. I wouldn.t put it past them.

I hope this point isn't missing the topic.

The KEY to winning is acceptance of Open Carry by Momma. In America mothers have a major influence (the most in single parent households) on the values of their children.

We are seeing a remarkable change in women's attitudes towards guns. Manufacturers now market firearms and products especially made for women. Women are not only buying guns but are packing heat when in public. These pro-gun attitudes will be passed on to their children.

Let me give you a personal example. My wife grew up with guns in this house but she has never had much interest in guns, including handguns. In the past 5 months two events has really peaked her interest.

First for Christmas I brought her Colt Police Positve Specia. It is the first handgun she can shoot double action. She didn't like the Colt wood grips and after I put a set of Hogues on it she fell in love with it and looks forward to going shooting.

Then last Saturday we went to a Firearms Expo where various gun reps had handguns to shoot. After a lot of coaching my wife learned to cycle the slide and shot a SIG P239. She enjoyed learning to shoot it and commented more than once it was fun. She wasn't the only woman there trying out guns. There were wives and girlfriends doing the same thing.

My gun club puts on Women On Target event every year. We have a good turnout in a relaxed shooting environment with lot of instructors on hand.

What my rambling long winded point is as women understand what a firearm is, how it works and it's purpose (I.e. Self-defense, hunting, target shooting) they lose their fear of them. Thus open carry is not something to be feared.

As SAM1911 says it will take time but not as much time as it may seem. As the old commercial said "You've come a long way Baby."

Sergei Mosin said:

The contrast between these two people and the two open-carriers I saw last week is remarkable. The ones I saw were clean-cut young men, casually but neatly dressed, carrying handguns in what appeared to be Safariland retention holsters. They didn't take pictures, they didn't go out of their way to draw attention to themselves, they were friendly (one greeted me as a supporter of the same sports team), they went about their business like normal people. They were good ambassadors for open carry.

Unfortunately, it's a lot easier to do harm to a cause than to do good for a cause.

Click to expand...

I'm out there doing just that, from time to time...but man...you do it like that and most people assume you are an off duty cop or similar...which doesn't give us even an ounce of positive impact.

And then we have these guys......ugh

HexHead said:

While what they did is just plain stupid, the bigger evil is Facebook. Social media will be the end of this country.

Click to expand...

it is interesting that you say that on an internet message board. Sharing common interest on the web is ok as long as you don't put a face to it?

conw said:

This reads like an attempt at misdirection in order divert attention away from the public relations blunder made by the fringe goofballs shown in the pic.

It appears you're more comfortable rehashing older online debates that aren't relevant to this issue than engaging in a discussion where people have a legitimate criticism and, I would argue, a serious basis for concern.

Hopefully no one will take the bait.

I don't want to read too much into your statement though; maybe it was just dry humor .

I would be curious to know your thoughts as to whether this incident, as pertains to PR for gun owners is

-net positive
-net negative
-other (please specify)

If you agree with most of us that it's a net negative, do you think it's appropriate to have a discussion within our community and voice dissent to dissuade this sort of thing from happening (as it's now happened multiple times), or do you feel (as I have gathered from your posts) that to do so is inappropriate?

I have gathered from your posts in the past that maybe you feel anyone expressing such dissent may have a hidden agenda that's incompatible with truly being pro gun. I'm not sure if that's actually the case for you but I strongly disagree with that view.

Click to expand...

I think it does more harm than good that we allow ourselves to be divided by their actions. You don't hear "moderate" anti-gun people complaining about the "extreme" anti-gun people do you?

Let's let the anti-gun crowd complain about them instead of the pro-gun people complaining about them.

Isn't one of the arguments is that they are just doing their actions to get attention? And, aren't we giving them exactly what they are wanting according to that argument? Isn't it better to just ignore them, from several different standpoints.... isn't the more dissension that we have toward them just more ammo that the anti-s can use? "See! Look at that! Even gun owner's agree with us!"

NavyLCDR said:

I think it does more harm than good that we allow ourselves to be divided by their actions. You don't hear "moderate" anti-gun people complaining about the "extreme" anti-gun people do you?

Let's let the anti-gun crowd complain about them instead of the "pro-gun" people complaining about them.

Click to expand...

I dont really think we are divided, at least not evenly. The VAST majority of gun owners (and people here) do not seem to approve of their actions.

You premise is faulty because of this. It is not dividing. It is a small minority acting in a manor that is counter productive. We as a community need to point this out to hopefully limit the idiots doing it and the damage they do

By you logic we should support everything a "pro gun" person does legally, regardless of how stupid it is, and even if it is just one person.

Putting an unloaded gun up to my head and pulling the trigger is legal. Should I do it on the internet just to prove guns are not dangerous? Who cares about that silly rule of pointing a gun. It is legal, it is my right, and it should be supported by you

TennJed said:

You premise is faulty because of this. It is not dividing. It is a small minority acting in a manor that is counter productive. We as a community need to point this out to hopefully limit the idiots doing it and the damage they do.

Click to expand...

Why do we, as a community need to point out that we think their actions are counter productive? If the vast majority of gun owners feel that their action is counter productive than why do we need to speak out against it to limit it? Would the vast majority of people who think it is counter productive not do it anyway?

You have to realize - speaking out against their actions is ENCOURAGING them to continue - not hindering them.

We don't have to support them if we don't agree with them - but that does not mean that we have to speak out against them, either.

The vast majority of pro-gun people will say that you can't argue with an anti-gun person because we won't change their minds - well, why doesn't the same apply to the "extreme" portion of the pro-gun community as well? Are we going to change their minds by complaining about them? And the vast majority of gun owners who disagree with their actions aren't going to be persuaded to engage in their behavior either, even if we don't publicly denounce their activities. So, what GOOD does it do us to denounce their activities?

NavyLCDR said:

You don't hear "moderate" anti-gun people complaining about the "extreme" anti-gun people do you?

Click to expand...

That's because unlike us, the anti-gun people don't give a crap what we think.

It's a lot easier to get what you want their way. Just like a business trying to chase what their competitors are doing rather than focusing on their own business model.

Navy, regarding your points about fringe self styled activists...

Generally people who do this basically represent themselves as gun rights advocates, full stop. Intentionally or not they're seen as representing gun owners. This is quite different from (for example) the narrative when someone who uses a gun to commit a felony is caught and the news covers it. We don't NEED to distance ourselves from the latter because our PR campaign has already done that. We have successfully demonstrated and made part of narrative that "we" are law abiding citizens and by definition since the vast majority of "us" don't do that we do not have to answer for it. But in my view this is because we've fought to make that very clear and repeated it over and over.

What we haven't done is clearly spelled out that people like the fringe self styles activists don't represent us, and

-they often claim to do so
-people believe them
-associations are made for other reasons even when the individuals may not overly claim to represent gun owners

And that's a problem.


This plays right into anti gun narratives and is uncritically accepted by those who don't have enough experience or connections with gun owners to discern otherwise.

Surely we've all seen this in many of the news reports on the issue?

That is a very good reason to publicly distance oneself, regardless of whether it encourages them or gives them pause.

NavyLCDR said:

Why do we, as a community need to point out that we think their actions are counter productive? If the vast majority of gun owners feel that their action is counter productive than why do we need to speak out against it to limit it? Would the vast majority of people who think it is counter productive not do it anyway?

You have to realize - speaking out against their actions is ENCOURAGING them to continue - not hindering them.

We don't have to support them is we don't agree with them - but that does not mean that we have to speak out against them, either.

Click to expand...

because there are people just now getting into firearms that are new and learning. We need to steer them in the right direction.

TennJed said:

because there are people just now getting into firearms that are new and learning. We need to steer them in the right direction.

Click to expand...

You really don't think they are smart enough to figure that out on their own? And who is to say that "our" direction is right for them?

LCDR, the issue is that companies are reacting to this behavior by posting their properties and restricting not just open carry, but all carry. Starbucks tried for a long time the remain neutral while open carry advocates acted like obnoxious fools, turning businesses into rallying places.

In some states posting a business no firearms allowed might not carry any real penalty, but in some it does.


I for one am growing weary of people who think acting in obnoxious ways has no consequences because of a 2A right. No, there might not be support to have a bill making OC an illegal act in a state legislature or on the federal level, but business will respond just like Starbucks and Chipotle have. And that most certainly does affect me.

Posted by Bullfrog Ken :
LCDR, the issue is that companies are reacting to this behavior by posting their properties and restricting not just open carry, but all carry. Starbucks tried for a long time the remain neutral while open carry advocates acted like obnoxious fools, turning businesses into rallying places.

Click to expand...

As I also said in that other thread, social media like FB and Twitter will be the end of this country.