A friend and I had legally carried firearms confiscated tonight
- Thread starter The Undertoad
- Start date
- Status
Lone_Gunman
Member
No I disagree, bad guys usually dont carry their guns out in the open.
But I do think that the public views people who carry guns openly as one of two groups: cops or crazy people.
I don't know him, but I pretty much agree with what he is saying. I am not a gun grabber, just don't see a need to cause a big stir by toting a hog leg in public.
Hmm... that sounds kind of personal.
It looks like the supporters of open carry can't put forth a logical argument short of name calling? Come on, I was hoping for at least a high school level debate here.
Really?
-CorIthoughtthatyourjudgementonthiscasewasclearsinceyoudecidedthat
opencarryruinsitforusallexceptIassumeinthecaseofuniformedofficerswho
peoplehavebeenconditionedtoacceptaslawfulcarriersofweaponsTheother
sideoftheopencarrycoinisofcoursethatifpeopleareexposedtolawabidingand
politecitizenscarryinghandgunsopenlythey'llbegintorealizethatperhaps
noteveryonewhocarriesagunisacoporacriminalandwhenyourcarrypiecegets
accidentallyexposedsomedayyouwon'thavetodealwiththekindofharassment
thatUndertoadhashadtodex
PS Those of you who say "legally open carry if you want, but don't complain when you're harassed by people who are supposedly hired to ensure the law is followed" make me wonder. Should authors of unpopular books submit to police harassment and not whine about it?
Or, put plainly, should only popular rights be defended and only popular means of execution of rights be protected?
How would you feel if police decided that concealed carry of a firearm was suitable cause for weapon seizure and detention?
Are you arguing against all carry, or just open carry?
cropcirclewalker
member
So if I open carry and if I am not a cop, what am I? Is that name calling?
So if I open carry and I am not a cop, what am I? Is that name calling?
With that, I agree.
Lone_Gunman
Member
My comments are intended for open carry. I carry concealed daily.
I am not opposed to open carry on moral or legal grounds, and I agree everybody has a right to do it. If they want to exercise that right, I wouldn't try to stop it, I would only question the logic of open carry.
It is simply reality that a lot of people are made nervous by open carry. Its not right, its just the way it is. So if you open carry, I dont see why you would be surprised that people react to you differently.
I could exercise my free speech right by wearing a swatiska, tearing up the Bible, and preaching the doctrine of the Ku Klux Klan in public. But people might think I was a little crazy if I did it.
Bottom line is, if you carry open, at least part of the public is going to be freaked out, I don't see any reason to call unwanted attention to myself.
cropcirclewalker, I dont think I called you any names. My statement was that if you carry open, some of the public is going to think you are crazy. I am not necessarily one of them, but there are a lot of people out there who would think so.
Wildalaska
member
Yeah Cordex really..notice I havent commented specifically on the facts of Undertoads case (ecept to mention he should pay for his own lawyer)...since I dont know what the facts are and am only seeing his view of it...
As to the efficacy of carrying concealed I have made my views known over and over again...without conceding that carrying a firearm is constituionally protected, I note that there are lots of things are constituionally protected that I wont do...
Like burn a flag...
Wilddoyouknowwhatreallyhappenedin undertoadscaseAlaska
RealGun
Member
Open carry rights are worthless if you can still be routinely harassed because of it. I would ask the DA to drop charges and certainly point out why by way of a lawyer. If it's expensive despite having done nothing wrong, I would sue, if VCDL will back you up. Although from SC, if VCDL sets up a fund administration, I would be willing to send a check.
In SC we currently have a guy who, as a security guard, killed a crazy in self defense. His story is solid. He is being held on murder charges. He needs money too.
In SC we currently have a guy who, as a security guard, killed a crazy in self defense. His story is solid. He is being held on murder charges. He needs money too.
Oh. So when you say you don't see a need to cause a big stir by "toting a hog leg in public" you only mean in a manner that causes a stir. Would you therefore stop carrying altogether if a reporter decided to do a sensational piece on people who carry weapons concealed and a stir was raised over concealed carriers?
Well ... sure ... but wearing a swastika or tearing up a Bible or advocating the KKK isn't cause for police to harass you (assuming that you're doing so in an otherwise lawful manner). If police do harass you for those actions, a phone call to a local CLU will get plenty of support and often result either in an out of court settlement or a successful lawsuit. So why should those who choose to open carry have to live with police harassment - and moreover be told to not complain about it when it happens? Why would people who claim to support civil rights where it comes to gun control actually grant tacit approval to police who abuse their authority to harass lawful gun owners? I just can't figure that out.
I'm with you 100% and therefore have chosen to carry concealed. But I won't blindly tell people who have chosen to carry openly that they're idiots who hurt our cause and have no reason to do so and deserve what they get.
Given that this case happened in Virginia, I find all the antipathy to open carry interesting. One of the few legislative losses VCDL suffered this year was failure to get the ban on concealed carry in restaurants repealed. As someone has pointed out, in Virginia, if you patronize a restaurant that serves alcohol, concealed carry is against the law and open carry is your only option (and a perfectly legal one). If the powers that be were really that concerned about the citizenry getting freaked out over open carry, you'd think they wouldn't be forcing people into doing so (most of the police organizations who took a stand opposed the repeal).
Open carry, by nice, polite, ordinary folks, is one way to counter the "guns = bad" mindset. But don't kid yourself: the right, like all rights, comes with responsibilities. You are now Prime Target for any malefactors* planning armed robbery/assault/etc. near you. You are morally bound to keep that sidearm secure -- lest little Johnny, JD in training, yank it from your holster and sprint away. Your behavior must be held to a higher standard: you can carry a gun or a temper, but not both. Others will examine you and your behavior with greater critical interest than they would were you not visibly armed.
Personally, I'm not up to it. (In my state, they frown on open carry anyway). I carry concealed. But that does not mean I think others should be denied the option!
I want to find out where this is that I can doff my top on the hot days -- come August, that would be right nice sometimes. On the other hand, those darned pin-ups you boys look at set the bar altogether too high. Old & sweaty is not purty. Sendec, folks wouldn't stare, they'd run off screaming!
...I do worry about open carry in a Starbucks: that stuff is caustic! I'm not sure I'd want to risk exposing a fine firearm to it.
--Her(ohthe heckI'm goin'topless,dreamonyalowlives!)self
________________
*okay, it's a polysyllable. But it's almost impossible to misconstrue.
Personally, I'm not up to it. (In my state, they frown on open carry anyway). I carry concealed. But that does not mean I think others should be denied the option!
I want to find out where this is that I can doff my top on the hot days -- come August, that would be right nice sometimes. On the other hand, those darned pin-ups you boys look at set the bar altogether too high. Old & sweaty is not purty. Sendec, folks wouldn't stare, they'd run off screaming!
...I do worry about open carry in a Starbucks: that stuff is caustic! I'm not sure I'd want to risk exposing a fine firearm to it.
--Her(ohthe heckI'm goin'topless,dreamonyalowlives!)self
________________
*okay, it's a polysyllable. But it's almost impossible to misconstrue.
Last edited:
Lone_Gunman
Member
If it is concealed, it can't cause a stir. No one knows its there.
I agree, and I also agree that there was no cause for the police to have harassed the protagonist of this thread, and nothing I have said implies that.
Nor have I said any of that. All I have said is that some people are going to be freaked out by it, and don't see a reason to draw that kind of attention.
Selfdfenz
Member
Posted previously>
"Someone actually gets it! A right not exercised because it is a hassle or upsets others is no RIGHT AT ALL just like ScottS says!
That's really not such a difficult concept to understand."
Here's one to run with then.....
As a pedistrian you have the right of way over cars in my local. End of story.
This morning a very unfortunate elderly woman exercised that right in front of a Mercedes and he was not able to get stopped. Stuck her and knocked her out of her shoes. I have not heard for the FD/MedEvac how she is doing.
BUT!....Am I torturing your logic to say that she preserved respect for her right to cross streets by this exercise. Guess she really taught the dude in the MB a lesson uh.
Let me ask where some of you start applying the logic of right time, right place and common sense to your argument? Or is it an all or none deal. Guess so.
Not once did I read the guys were in fear they were about to get gunned by thugs waiting for their coffee. They were making their point by golly and they did it. GB'em I hope they win and win big. What pride thay can take going back to Starbucks and ananana their by then new staff. Big win!!!!!!
Also, don't know if Rosa Parks was hurt making her point but many were and hurt bad. If you could ask them would they and been willing to stay healthy and still get the same result, I bet all would take that option. I think if these young men wanted to make a point there were better times, better places and using approaches that exemply a more example of good common sense.
BTW I have carried open...in the woods where it made sense, not at Starbucks.
I have a CHL for the rest of it.
S-
Let me ask where some of you start applying the logic of right time, right place and common sense to your argument? Or is it an all or none deal. Guess so.
"Someone actually gets it! A right not exercised because it is a hassle or upsets others is no RIGHT AT ALL just like ScottS says!
That's really not such a difficult concept to understand."
Here's one to run with then.....
As a pedistrian you have the right of way over cars in my local. End of story.
This morning a very unfortunate elderly woman exercised that right in front of a Mercedes and he was not able to get stopped. Stuck her and knocked her out of her shoes. I have not heard for the FD/MedEvac how she is doing.
BUT!....Am I torturing your logic to say that she preserved respect for her right to cross streets by this exercise. Guess she really taught the dude in the MB a lesson uh.
Let me ask where some of you start applying the logic of right time, right place and common sense to your argument? Or is it an all or none deal. Guess so.
Not once did I read the guys were in fear they were about to get gunned by thugs waiting for their coffee. They were making their point by golly and they did it. GB'em I hope they win and win big. What pride thay can take going back to Starbucks and ananana their by then new staff. Big win!!!!!!
Also, don't know if Rosa Parks was hurt making her point but many were and hurt bad. If you could ask them would they and been willing to stay healthy and still get the same result, I bet all would take that option. I think if these young men wanted to make a point there were better times, better places and using approaches that exemply a more example of good common sense.
BTW I have carried open...in the woods where it made sense, not at Starbucks.
I have a CHL for the rest of it.
S-
Let me ask where some of you start applying the logic of right time, right place and common sense to your argument? Or is it an all or none deal. Guess so.
gunsmith
member
lets not get this thread shut down!
Crop guy
I am completely in the "bear any arm you like any way you like"camp.
But calling Sendec a horrible,vile name like "gun controller"
is too much even for me!
Don't you know children may see that!
Crop guy
I am completely in the "bear any arm you like any way you like"camp.
But calling Sendec a horrible,vile name like "gun controller"
is too much even for me!
Don't you know children may see that!
cropcirclewalker
member
Hi, ho, there, Mr. Toad
I was arrested myself almost 2 years ago for openly carrying in my car at the St. Louis Airport. I sat chained to a bench for a couple of hours talking to the nice, polite but ignorant police guys while their lowbrow leaders sat in another room trying to think of something to charge me with. Then they hadda let me go. I have been immunized about fearing the "Officer Friendly".
The cop is NOT your friend.
Since then, I have discovered something like title 18 or something called sort of like "depriving one of their civil rights under the color of law" There is a thread here somewhere about it from a guy from Colorado.
Look it up.
About Open Carry and why it seems LEOs admit that it's legal, but that one shouldn't do it. They claim that it makes the sheeple nervous, but I think it ;
1) Makes the LEO nervous. Sort of irrational since there could be lots of ccw types there too.
2) Takes away some of their thunder. Cops are used to giving instructions and expecting them to be followed. Implicit in their instructions is the threat of violence. They have a gun. When they are confronted by a lawfully armed citizen, they lose some influence.
(insert some disclaimer here that not ALL leos are control freaks, just most)
3) It is my opinion that many leos on this forum are closet gun controllers. They infiltrate amongst the liberty minded hoping to amelearate (sp?) the attitudes of many of us that have had just about enough. You know, common sense, don'tspoilitfortherestofusI'llaskher, MMM, reasonable, VPC, don't panic the sheeple stuff like that.
Who amongst us would lock up a person for asserting a God given right protected by the constitution? As the guys at Nuremburg found out, Just following orders is not a defense.
I was arrested myself almost 2 years ago for openly carrying in my car at the St. Louis Airport. I sat chained to a bench for a couple of hours talking to the nice, polite but ignorant police guys while their lowbrow leaders sat in another room trying to think of something to charge me with. Then they hadda let me go. I have been immunized about fearing the "Officer Friendly".
The cop is NOT your friend.
Since then, I have discovered something like title 18 or something called sort of like "depriving one of their civil rights under the color of law" There is a thread here somewhere about it from a guy from Colorado.
Look it up.
About Open Carry and why it seems LEOs admit that it's legal, but that one shouldn't do it. They claim that it makes the sheeple nervous, but I think it ;
1) Makes the LEO nervous. Sort of irrational since there could be lots of ccw types there too.
2) Takes away some of their thunder. Cops are used to giving instructions and expecting them to be followed. Implicit in their instructions is the threat of violence. They have a gun. When they are confronted by a lawfully armed citizen, they lose some influence.
(insert some disclaimer here that not ALL leos are control freaks, just most)
3) It is my opinion that many leos on this forum are closet gun controllers. They infiltrate amongst the liberty minded hoping to amelearate (sp?) the attitudes of many of us that have had just about enough. You know, common sense, don'tspoilitfortherestofusI'llaskher, MMM, reasonable, VPC, don't panic the sheeple stuff like that.
Who amongst us would lock up a person for asserting a God given right protected by the constitution? As the guys at Nuremburg found out, Just following orders is not a defense.
And what if a reporter obtained and released a list of CCW holders in your county as has happened elsewhere? Suddenly anyone who has that list and knows your name (say, at any place you present a credit card or check) suddenly "knows" (or thinks) that you're carrying.
Or maybe if you accidentally expose your concealed weapon. (It happens.)
Instant stir.
And I have no beef with you or your chosen method of carry.
No you haven't, and I'm sorry I wasn't clear. While I was responding to your post, I was directing that particular statement at others who have posted in this thread.
fjolnirsson
Member
I picked this quote pretty much at random from a bunch of others which seemed to press the same point. That point being that open carry is bad.
On another thread, I saw a comment from someone(don't remember who), which said something to the effect of,"carry a gun all you want, but keep it concealed, people don't need to see that $$$$."
Hmm, about 25 years ago, folks said much the same things about homosexuals. "I don't care if they want to do that sort of thing at home, but I don't want to see it."
Gays and lesbians were ostracized and discriminated against for their personal lives. Exactly what many gun owners go through today. Gays and lesbians were fired from jobs in many cases because they had been"outed". It isn't that bad for us (yet), but how many of us are subjected to anti gun propaganda at work?
Let's see now, how did the gay/lesbian community deal with this? They got active. They decided they wouldn't hide it anymore.
Now they have the right to have "open carry" relationships anywhere they like.
I guess they should have just kept quiet, and they wouldn't have gotten hurt. I guess if they had just kept it out of sight, they would have been better off. I guess if they hadn't rocked the boat, it wouldn't have been "ruined for the rest of us".
Hmmm. Why do I bother.
By the way, given the choice, I'll carry concealed.
gunsmith
member
some times
even experienced CCW folks let their guard down and some one see's their carry gun.
You should not be prosecuted for having an accidentaly untucked shirt.
BTW
Welcome to the high road ,Andrew and Undertoad.
Not every thread is so contentious,I have gotten very great advice from thr on things from ammo to zoology-good luck!
even experienced CCW folks let their guard down and some one see's their carry gun.
You should not be prosecuted for having an accidentaly untucked shirt.
BTW
Welcome to the high road ,Andrew and Undertoad.
Not every thread is so contentious,I have gotten very great advice from thr on things from ammo to zoology-good luck!
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
Sue the @#$%^&!s.
RealGun
Member
I don't think it's too much to ask for police to know what's legal in their State. I definitely expect the DA to know when to properly file charges. I think it is outrageous for us, of all people, to decide that the gun owner in this case is somehow at fault. Like lots of people, I wouldn't open carry if I could in most circumstances, but if others do it legally, it is none of my business whether it is wise to do so. I might offer thoughts to consider, but I wouldn't feel it appropriate to discredit someone.
If more people became accustomed to seeing people carrying guns and were aware that it was legal and why they might be doing so, we wouldn't have so much hassle about gun rights. Our carrying could be considered just as normal as that of the police.
I think more incidents could occur if open carry were pervasive, but why turn ourselves into antigunners by insisting that concealed carry was the only responsible way to carry a gun. The police do fine with open carry. What's the difference, if one prefers not to be discreet? In an ideal world without infringements on RKBA, it's supposed to be free choice. We are buying into a lot of antigun logic to think of it any other way. Other open carry States do okay, because people are used to seeing it.
What should have happened here is that when called, the police should have assured the Starbucks that these fellows were good to go, and we'd all be applauding the story.
ScottS
Member
Well...actually you misspelled your own name, unless you're now going to be known as Widl Alaska. Kind of takes some of the steam out of it, don't it?
My, aren't we testy? I never said your posts were stupid. But the cutesy little thing in between the name...come on.
Well, to me, flaming is calling someone names and adding nothing of substance to the conversation. Kind of like, "Oh yeah, well there's just no talking to you! You're too dumb!" You know...kind of like this:
The question you have not answered is this: How has the VCDL, an ardent supporter of open carry rights, "ruined it" for the people of VA? I'll wait, and please give examples.
As for the "only people who open carry are cops and badguys" argument, aside from the outrageous attitude this displays, let me ask the LEO's this: Do the "badguys" really carry openly in $80 Kydex holsters? How often have you seen this? For me, if I see a guy open-carrying, the one thing I'm sure of is he's not a badguy. Similarly, if I see someone's t-shirt slide to the side, and notice a pistol stuffed in his waistband, I'm more likely to give this guy the hairy eyeball. I won't automatically assume he's a badguy, but he's higher on the threat list than the guy who's openly wearing a 1911 in a Blade-tech holster on a Wilderness Instructor Belt.
Scott
UPDATE
Looks like we win. I got a call from the Pres. of VCDL (Andrew called them earlier today) stating that the VCDL had contacted the Ffx. PD and that they police had acknowledged fault and had agreed to drop the charges and issue a full apology, clear my record, and return my Glock. The cop is supposed to call when he gets on duty later tonight, in about an hour. I'll post how it goes here, and Andrew hopefully will post later. I plan on getting everything in writing. Unless the cops feel like stalling with the return of my gun or clearing my record, a lawsuit likely will not happen. Thanks for the help.
-Will
Looks like we win. I got a call from the Pres. of VCDL (Andrew called them earlier today) stating that the VCDL had contacted the Ffx. PD and that they police had acknowledged fault and had agreed to drop the charges and issue a full apology, clear my record, and return my Glock. The cop is supposed to call when he gets on duty later tonight, in about an hour. I'll post how it goes here, and Andrew hopefully will post later. I plan on getting everything in writing. Unless the cops feel like stalling with the return of my gun or clearing my record, a lawsuit likely will not happen. Thanks for the help.
-Will
ScottS
Member
Will,
Congratulations! I'm glad right prevailed in this instance.
You're a better man than I not to sue, but that's another matter. For now, congratulations.
And congratulations to the VCDL for showing--once again--what a state gun rights advocacy group is supposed to be. We all owe these guys thanks.
Scott
Congratulations! I'm glad right prevailed in this instance.
You're a better man than I not to sue, but that's another matter. For now, congratulations.
And congratulations to the VCDL for showing--once again--what a state gun rights advocacy group is supposed to be. We all owe these guys thanks.
Scott
7.62FullMetalJacket
Member
If they apologize and return everything in short order, call it a day. And expunge the record.
- Status
